Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

High diagnostic accuracy of subcutaneous Triptorelin test compared with GnRH test for diagnosing central precocious puberty in girls.

CONTEXT: The GnRH test is the gold standard to confirm the diagnosis of central precocious puberty (CPP); however, this compound is not always readily available. Diagnostic accuracy of subcutaneous GnRH analogues tests compared to classical GnRH test has not been reported.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of Triptorelin test (index test) compared to the GnRH test (reference test) in girls with suspicion of CPP.

DESIGN: A prospective, case-control, randomized clinical trial was performed. CPP or precocious thelarche (PT) was diagnosed according to maximal LH response to GnRH test and clinical characteristics during follow-up.

PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS: Forty-six girls with premature breast development randomly underwent two tests: (i) intravenous GnRH 100 μg, (ii) subcutaneous Triptorelin acetate (0.1 mg/m(2), to a maximum of 0.1 mg) with blood sampling at 0, 3 and 24 h for LH, FSH and estradiol ascertainment.

MEASUREMENTS: Gonadotrophins and estradiol responses to Triptorelin test were measured by ultrasensitive assays.

RESULTS: Clinical features were similar between CPP (n = 33) and PT (n = 13) groups. Using receiver operating characteristic curves, maximal LH response (LH-3 h) under Triptorelin test ≥ 7 IU/l by immunofluorometric assay (IFMA) or ≥ 8 IU/l by electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (ECLIA) confirmed the diagnosis of CPP with specificity of 1.00 (95% CI: 0.75-1.00) and sensitivity 0.76 (95% CI: 0.58-0.89). Considering either LH-3 h or maximal estradiol response at 24 h (cut-off value, 295 pm), maintaining the specificity at 1.00, the test sensitivity increased to 0.94 (95% CI: 0.80-0.99) and the diagnostic efficiency to 96%.

CONCLUSION: The Triptorelin test had high accuracy for the differential diagnosis of CPP vs PT in girls providing a valid alternative to the classical GnRH test. This test also allowed a comprehensive evaluation of the pituitary-ovarian axis.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app