Phenotypic features of polycystic ovary syndrome and their covariates among Bengali young adult females assessed by three major diagnostic guidelines

Le résumé fourni par la source

Objective Three major guidelines (Rotterdam, National Institutes of Health (NIH) and Androgen Excess Society (AES)) have been proposed to diagnose polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). The concordance of these guidelines, along with covariates of individual phenotypic features, has been explored among young Bangalee women. Methods This observational study included 158 PCOS (diagnosed by Modified Rotterdam Criteria 2003) and 127 non-PCOS women (PCOS, 55%; age 18–35 years). Phenotypic characteristics were collected following standard procedures/investigations. Ovarian folliculometry was done with ultrasonography and a 75 g oral glucose tolerance test was performed. Serum total testosterone, SHBG and C-peptide were measured by chemiluminescence immunoassay and Free Androgen Index (FAI) was computed. Subjects were recategorised following NIH and AES criteria, and concordance between the guidelines was assessed by kappa test. Associations between phenotypic features of PCOS and their covariates were explored. Results As compared with 55% of the Rotterdam criteria-based PCOS among overall subjects, the proportion was 43% with NIH and 51% with AES criteria (k=0.76 and k=0.90 as compared with Rotterdam, respectively). FAI correlated positively with fasting blood glucose (FBG) in all the criteria-based groups (p<0.45 to <0.001). Body mass index, waist-hip ratio, FBG and 2-hour-after blood glucose were the significant covariates independently associated with phenotypic features of clinical (anovulation/oligomenorrhoea) and biochemical (FAI) hyperandrogenism; however, there were overlapping and variations among different criteria regarding these associations. Conclusions NIH criteria may underdiagnose PCOS among Bangalee young women, and overweight/obesity as well as hyperglycaemia are major covariates underlying the phenotypic feature of hyperandrogenism in this group.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.