4.2 Article

Prevalence of conditions causing chronic anovulation and the proposed algorithm for anovulation evaluation

Journal

JOURNAL OF OBSTETRICS AND GYNAECOLOGY RESEARCH
Volume 41, Issue 7, Pages 1074-1079

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/jog.12685

Keywords

amenorrhea; anovulation; congenital adrenal hyperplasia; oligomenorrhea; polycystic ovary syndrome

Ask authors/readers for more resources

AimThis study investigated the prevalence of disease-causing chronic anovulation and proposes a logical investigation flowchart to facilitate diagnosis in women presenting with chronic anovulation. Material and MethodsThe cross-sectional retrospective study was performed using 293 reproductive-aged women who were diagnosed with chronic anovulation at the Gynecologic Endocrinology Unit, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University between January 2008 and December 2012. The demographic data, laboratory investigations and diagnoses were collected. ResultsAmong 293 patients recruited into the study, the common causes of anovulation were polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) (73.4%), prolactin disorder (13.3%) and unexplained chronic anovulation (7.5%). The less common causes were thyroid disorders, congenital adrenal hyperplasia, adrenal tumors and Cushing's disease. There was a strong positive association between the levels of 17-hydroxyprogesterone and/or dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate with the levels of testosterone and androstenedione. The sensitivity and specificity of serum luteinizing hormone to accurately diagnose PCOS were 29.38% and 55.56% (P=0.03). The luteinizing hormone/follicle-stimulating hormone ratio3 had a sensitivity and specificity at 18.56% and 92.86% (P=0.03) for PCOS diagnosis. ConclusionSerum androstenedione, testosterone, thyroid-stimulating hormone, prolactin levels and pelvic ultrasonography should be included in the initial investigations for anovulation. The 17-hydroxyprogesterone and dehydroepiandrosterone sulfate levels can be used for secondary anovulation evaluations.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available