Searchable abstracts of presentations at key conferences in endocrinology
Endocrine Abstracts (2015) 39 EP104 | DOI: 10.1530/endoabs.39.EP104

BSPED2015 e-Posters Pituitary and growth (18 abstracts)

Overcoming the need for a second test: an evaluation of anthropometric, biochemical, and radiological parameters in the diagnosis of GH deficiency

Muzzammil Ali , Angela Casey , Jeremy Kirk & Renuka Dias

26 views


Birmingham Children’s Hospital, Birmingham, UK.


Background: The investigation of short stature includes evaluation of a number of clinical, radiological, and biochemical factors. This often includes dynamic function testing to rule out abnormalities of the hypothalamic–pituitary axis to rule out GH deficiency (GHD). NICE guidance advises that two GH stimulation tests demonstrating subnormal GH peak <6.7 μg/ml (20 mU/l) is required to confirm the diagnosis of GHD.

Objectives: To interrogate various clinical and biochemical parameters to reduce the need for dynamic function testing in the diagnosis of isolated GHD (IGHD) vs idiopathic short stature (ISS).

Methods: A retrospective case-review of all patients in a single centre from 2002 to 2014 undergoing two provocation tests.

Results: 138 patients underwent GH testing, 32% (45) had a normal GH peak (>6.7 μg/l) on repeat testing.

IGHDISSP value
Gender27F: 66M (n=93)13F: 32M (n=45)
Mean
Age at first assessment8.1 (0.95–16.29; S.D. 4.2)7.9 (1.09–14.1; S.D. 3.7)NS
BA delay−1.1 (−5.2 to 2.8; S.D. 1.33)−0.86 (−5.8 to 1.5; S.D. 1.2)NS
Low IGF137 (39.8%)10 (22%)NS
HV SDS pre-test−0.86 (−5.9 to 5.1; S.D. 2.1)−0.5 (−5.3 to 11.85; S.D. 3.3)NS
HV SDS 1 year post test2.36 (−4.3 to 13.6; S.D. 3.5)0.6 (−5.2 to 7.2; S.D. 3.5)0.016
Final height SDS−0.92 (−5.6 to 1.8; S.D. 1.9)−1.19 (−2.2 to 0.6; S.D. 0.9)NS

Conclusions: Approximately one-third of patients who undergo dynamic function testing for GHD will have a normal GH peak on re-test. We have previously shown that there is no cut-off on the first test that will predict an abnormal second test. There is no difference between IGHD vs ISS in terms of mean BA delay, IGF1 levels and pre-test HV SDS which improves the pre-test probability of having a low GH peak on two tests. There is a significant difference between HV SDS between IGHD and ISS 1 year after dynamic testing, reflecting the effect of GH treatment in IGHD. There appears to be no significant difference in final height outcomes in either group. At present, undertaking two GH stimulation tests appears to be the best way to distinguish IGHD from ISS.

Volume 39

43rd Meeting of the British Society for Paediatric Endocrinology and Diabetes

British Society for Paediatric Endocrinology and Diabetes 

Browse other volumes

Article tools

My recent searches

No recent searches.