What the specialist is actually trying to work out
Pituitary surgery is not one decision. The treating team has to separate several questions: whether the lesion is causing a hormone problem, whether it is pressing on the nerves that carry vision, what the scan shows about the size and position of the lesion, and whether an operation is the right route at all. Endoscopic transsphenoidal surgery reaches the pituitary region through the nose, so the anatomy around the nasal passages and the sphenoid sinus also matters to the surgical plan.
Your existing records are useful because they may already answer part of that. A hormone panel can show whether a particular axis is overactive, underactive or apparently normal. Visual field testing can show whether peripheral vision is affected in a way you may not have noticed. The MRI can show the lesion's size, its relationship to the optic chiasm and whether it extends into the cavernous sinus or elsewhere. None of those pieces is complete on its own, and a report that says 'pituitary macroadenoma' without the images tells the surgeon much less than the images themselves.
This is why the first useful step is not booking travel. It is working out which of those three strands is already documented, which is missing, and which question your current records cannot answer.
Hormone records: what to send and what they can and cannot show
Hormone assessment in pituitary disease is rarely a single blood test. Depending on your symptoms and the scan findings, clinicians may look at prolactin, growth hormone and IGF-1, cortisol and ACTH, thyroid function, and the gonadal axis. Sometimes dynamic testing or a 24-hour urine collection is used. The exact panel is a clinical decision, not something you should assemble yourself from a list.
What you can do is send the results you already have in a form a specialist can interpret. That means the actual laboratory report with units and reference ranges, not a typed summary. Reference ranges differ between laboratories, and a number without its range can be misleading. Include the date of each test, any medication you were taking at the time, and whether the sample was taken at a particular time of day, because some hormones are interpreted against timing.
Be clear about what these records can and cannot establish. They can show what was measured and when. They cannot tell a remote reviewer whether the pattern is stable, whether it is being affected by another medicine, or whether further testing is needed. If your records are old, incomplete or were done at a different laboratory, say so rather than trying to fill the gaps yourself. The treating endocrinologist decides whether existing results are sufficient or whether something needs to be repeated under their own protocol.
Vision records: why the field test matters as much as the scan
A pituitary lesion can press on the optic chiasm and affect the outer parts of vision before a patient notices. Formal visual field testing, usually automated perimetry, is how that is documented. If you have had a field test, send the printout or the raw data, not just a line in a clinic letter saying 'visual fields normal'. The pattern and the reliability indices matter to the neuro-ophthalmologist or neurosurgeon reviewing the case.
If you have not had field testing, that is a gap worth naming rather than guessing about. It is also not something to arrange on your own initiative before a specialist has reviewed the rest of the picture. The relevant question is whether the treating team wants it done locally before travel, repeated in China, or whether your existing test is recent enough to be useful. Ask them directly.
Also send any optical coherence tomography (OCT) results if they exist, and any record of visual acuity. If you have noticed changes in your peripheral vision, describe them in plain language with dates: what you noticed, when, and whether it has changed. That history is part of the assessment and cannot be reconstructed from a scan.
MRI: send the images, not only the report
A frequent gap in overseas pituitary enquiries is that the patient sends the radiology report but not the images. A report is one radiologist's summary. The surgeon planning an endoscopic transsphenoidal approach needs to see the actual sequences: how the lesion sits relative to the optic chiasm, the carotid arteries, the sphenoid sinus and the nasal anatomy. Those details can bear on whether the transsphenoidal route is appropriate and how the operation is planned.
Ask your imaging centre for the DICOM files on a disc or a secure download link, including all sequences, not selected images. If you have had more than one MRI, send the earlier study as well, because comparison over time can show whether the lesion is changing. If you have had a CT of the sinuses or a CT angiogram, include those too, since they can be relevant to the surgical corridor.
If your imaging was done some time ago, or if your symptoms have changed since, say so. Whether new imaging is needed before a decision is a question for the treating team, not something to assume either way. Do not arrange repeat imaging on your own before a specialist has reviewed what you already have.
What stays uncertain until the treating team assesses you
A records-based review can clarify a great deal, but it has real limits. It cannot confirm how you would tolerate anaesthesia, what your nasal and sinus anatomy is like on examination, or how your hormone status is behaving now rather than at the time of the last test. It cannot establish whether surgery is indicated, which approach is best, or what the plan should be if the lesion turns out to be a type that is usually managed without an operation.
It also cannot confirm hospital acceptance. A specialist who reviews your file may say the case looks suitable for assessment, but acceptance and the treatment plan belong to the hospital and the treating clinicians after they have seen you. Treat any remote opinion as a step towards that assessment, not as a substitute for it.
This is the honest boundary to hold in mind: your records can make the first specialist conversation much more productive, but they do not decide the treatment. If your vision is worsening, or you have a sudden severe headache, or you develop new confusion or weakness, that is a reason to seek urgent local care rather than wait for an overseas appointment.
How to organise the file without over-collecting
You do not need to send a complete medical archive at the first contact. A short summary of the diagnosis or suspected diagnosis, your main question, and a list of what records you hold is enough to start. After that first exchange, you can be guided on what to send and in what format.
A practical way to organise the file is by the three strands above. For hormones, keep the original laboratory reports with units, ranges and dates. For vision, keep the field test printouts, OCT results and any acuity records. For imaging, keep the DICOM files and the reports together, and note the date of each study. Add a one-page timeline of symptoms and key events, because that is often the fastest way for a clinician to understand the sequence.
Do not send passport numbers, payment details or a full archive through an initial enquiry form. Share sensitive documents only through the channel the coordinating team confirms. If a record is missing, say it is missing rather than leaving it out silently, because the specialist needs to know what they are not seeing.
The relevant reference for the procedure itself is the pituitary tumour surgery page, which sets out the treatment context this preparation supports.
- A one-page timeline: first symptoms, key tests, treatments tried, and what has changed recently.
- Hormone reports with units, reference ranges and collection dates, plus any medication you were taking.
- Visual field printouts, OCT results and visual acuity records, with dates.
- MRI DICOM files for every study, plus the written reports, and any sinus or vascular CT.
- A short list of your specific questions, so the first specialist conversation addresses them.
Sources & scope of this guide
References and official service information relevant to this guide.
This is general planning information and has not been individually reviewed by a doctor. Medical decisions and personal treatment advice come from your treating clinicians.