A Useless Organ That Doctors Often Remove

[Crayola227]

A 'Useless' Organ That Doctors Often Remove Could Actually Fight Cancer

There's a small fatty gland that sits behind your sternum and is often said to be 'useless' in adulthood.

www.sciencealert.com

I searched the forum for thymus. Maybe you all have heard about this? Thoughts?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[eyeeye_captain]

I clicked because I thought this was going to be a thread for jokes. Disappointed.

 

[Pir8DeacDoc]

"Often" seems like a bit of a stretch

 

[Crayola227]

"Often" seems like a bit of a stretch

I know basically nothing about surgery, but I thought a common standard when one was in the area, was to remove as much as you can for visualization, and some rationale about how the only thing it ever really does in the adult is potentially turn into cancer? So people would remove as much as they could? Or even if they didn't go out of their way to remove it, that steps wouldn't be taken to preserve it, and no one thought twice about it? So then this is challenging that idea?

Although I'm wondering now iirc a surgeon telling me that while they say it doesn't do anything, he liked to leave things like that alone because they always say stuff like that and then they're wrong, so if he doesn't know what something does, he doesn't mess with it.

I really was hoping you guys would come in and say more about it. I'm just a nerd and got excited that the thing we were always told was useless organ after a certain age, might have a utility.

I also wasn't sure how new this was, and if anyone was talking about it.

 

[LucidSplash]

I know basically nothing about surgery, but I thought a common standard when one was in the area, was to remove as much as you can for visualization, and some rationale about how the only thing it ever really does in the adult is potentially turn into cancer? So people would remove as much as they could? Or even if they didn't go out of their way to remove it, that steps wouldn't be taken to preserve it, and no one thought twice about it? So then this is challenging that idea?

Although I'm wondering now iirc a surgeon telling me that while they say it doesn't do anything, he liked to leave things like that alone because they always say stuff like that and then they're wrong, so if he doesn't know what something does, he doesn't mess with it.

I really was hoping you guys would come in and say more about it. I'm just a nerd and got excited that the thing we were always told was useless organ after a certain age, might have a utility.

I also wasn't sure how new this was, and if anyone was talking about it.

The only people who might be talking about it would be cardiac surgeons. Most of us surgeons that hang around here aren’t cardiac. And it’s one study. I doubt anyone is changing management over one study. You’d be better off linking to the actual study (link is in the references for the article) rather than a rather sensational headline.

 

[HighPriest]

Seems like a study with a high chance of selection bias. Why did the patients who had their thymus removed have their thymus removed, and do those medical conditions predispose someone to an increase in mortality regardless? Like myasthenia gravis, my understanding is that some people go in to remission after thymectomy, but up to half do not. That’s a bit of a rock and a hard place because if you’re operating on that patient group they’ve failed other therapy and have a serious medical condition where an increased risk ratio for mortality due to thymectomy might be worth it considering the alternative. But if half don’t go in to remission (assuming I’m right on that number, it’s a bit out of my wheelhouse), then half the people undergoing thymectomy continue to have a serious medical condition, and they also stay on immunosuppression, which in-and-of-itself increases the risk of death and cancer.

Plus I don’t think thymuses are being removed all that often. I see atrophied thymus all of the time, and have never tried to remove it. I’ve found a few parathyroids inside of it, but even then I didn’t try to take out the thymic fat. Not because I’m particularly afraid of long term effects but because “why would you?” It’s just adding risk to what you’re already doing.

In any case, this article was clearly written by someone who doesn’t really understand the background, but knows their audience. The news source hyperlinks “cancer” with an explanation of what cancer is, so it’s not especially technical.

 

[dienekes88]

As far as I know, it's only routinely removed in congenital heart surgery (and more typically neonatal surgery) in order to improve exposure. So "often" is quite a stretch. Even then, not everyone takes it out, and when they do it might only be half of it.