Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome (PCOS) in Adolescents with and Without History of Central Precocious Puberty (CPP).

ARCARI AJ; ESCOBAR ME; FREIRE A; BALLERINI MG; ROPELATO MG; BERGADA I; GRYNGARTEN M

Puerto Varas

Congreso; XXV Annual Meeting of the Latin American Pediatric Endocrinology Society (SLEP); 2015

Sociedad Latinoamericana de Endocrinologia Pediátrica (SLEP)

Introduction: The heterogeneity in clinical phenotype in PCOShas been recognized recently. The long-term consequences ofPCOS on metabolic dysfunction may be related to androgens excess.Girls with CPP have an increased prevalence of PCOS.Whether these patients present a different clinical or metabolicphenotype remains unknown.Objective: To evaluate if differences in clinical or biochemicalfeatures of PCO patients with or without history of CPP may havea differential impact on their metabolic profile at diagnosis.Patients and Methods: A retrospective study was performedin 65 adolescents with PCOS (16.2 ± 2.6 years, gynecological age4.6 ± 2.2 years) diagnosed according to Androgen?Excess-Societycriteria. Patients were divided into: History of CPP (GA, n = 24),and without history of CPP or premature pubarche (GB, n = 41).Menstrual disorders, BMI-SDS, clinical signs of hyperandrogenism,serum gonadotropins and androgens levels, ovarian ultrasoundpattern (PCOM), and HOMA-IR and G/I ratio at diagnosiswere assessed.Results: Menstrual abnormalities were present in 84% of patientsin GA and 100% in GB. The gynecological-age and BMI-SDSwere not different between groups (5.2 ± 2.2 vs 4.2 ± 2.1; 0.9 ± 0.8vs 0.6 ± 1.1, p=ns, respectively). Clinical hyperandrogenism wasfound in 75% in GA and 100% in GB. GA presented a significantlylower prevalence of PCOM (20%, 5/24) than GB (46%, 19/41,p = 0.03). Basal LH levels (mUI/ml) and the ratio LH/FSH weresignificantly lower in GA (8.5 ± 5.0 vs 12.2 ± 6.2 p = 0.03; 1.6 ± 1.1vs 2.2 ± 1.1 p = 0.01 respectively). Testosterone and Androstenedione(ng/ml) levels were also significantly lower in GA (0.5 ± 0.3vs 0.8 ± 0.3 p = 0.004; 2.4 ± 1.0 vs 3.8 ± 1.5 p=