Diagnostic relevance of suppressed basal concentrations of TSH compared with the negative TRH test in detection and exclusion of hyperthyroidism

To evaluate the sensitivity of basal TSH concentrations as determined by an "ultrasensitive" IRMA-assay (RIA-gnost h-TSH-monoclonal, Behring) versus a "negative" TRH test (defined as an increment of TSH less than or equal to 0.2 mU/l 20 min after administration of 400 micrograms TRH iv) in the diagnosis of hyperthyroidism we examined 193 consecutive patients from our thyroid outpatient clinic: 34 patients displayed hyperthyroidism (total T4: 184.4 +/- 26.0 mumol/l, effective thyroxine index: 1.25 +/- 0.08), whereas 12 had isolated T3-hyperthyroidism (total T3: 3.47 +/- 0.48 nmol/l). Employing the producer's definition of subnormal ("suppressed") bTSH concentrations (less than or equal to 0.1 mU/l), only 19 (41.3%) hyperthyroid patients would have been detected; on the other hand, one euthyroid patient would have been recognized false positively as hyperthyroid. Using the TRH test as criterion led to the correct diagnosis in 42 (sensitivity: 91.3%) hyperthyroid patients, whereas two had low bTSH concentrations (less than or equal to 0.5 mU/l), but a normal TSH response to TRH (greater than 2.0 mU/l). Raising the threshold concentration to 0.2 and, subsequently, to 0.4 mU TSH/l increased the number of correct results to 38 (sensitivity: 82.6%) and 43 (93.5%), respectively. This was associated with a concomitant decrease in specificity in the diagnosis of hyperthyroidism from 93.7 (0.1 mU/l) to 27.9% (0.4 mU/l). In conclusion, despite ultrasensitive methods for estimation of low TSH concentrations, the TRH test remains an irreplaceable tool for the correct diagnosis of hyperthyroidism.