Suppr超能文献

五种血清抗苗勒管激素检测方法对多囊卵巢综合征诊断的比较评估

Comparative assessment of five serum antimüllerian hormone assays for the diagnosis of polycystic ovary syndrome.

作者信息

Pigny Pascal, Gorisse Elisse, Ghulam Amjad, Robin Geoffroy, Catteau-Jonard Sophie, Duhamel Alain, Dewailly Didier

机构信息

Laboratoire de Biochimie and Hormonologie, Centre de Biologie Pathologie, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, Lille, France.

Service de Gynécologie Endocrinienne et Médecine de la Reproduction, Hôpital Jeanne de Flandre, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire, Lille, France.

出版信息

Fertil Steril. 2016 Apr;105(4):1063-1069.e3. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.12.023. Epub 2016 Jan 6.

Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether the different antimüllerian hormone (AMH) immunoassays on the market offer the same performance for the diagnosis of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS).

DESIGN

A total of 95 serum AMH samples were retrospectively evaluated for a period of 3 months in the same laboratory.

SETTING

Academic center laboratory.

PATIENT(S): Forty-eight control women with regular menses and no hyperandrogenism and 47 patients with classic PCOS (i.e., hyperandrogenism plus oligoanovulation) attending our department for infertility.

INTERVENTION(S): None.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): AMH measurement using five commercial assays. Method comparison and evaluation of the diagnostic performance by receiver operating characteristic analysis.

RESULT(S): Values obtained with Gen II and AL-105i ELISAs were similar to those provided by EAI AMH/MIS, whereas automatic assays generated lower values. A significant mean difference was observed between Access Dxi (1.35 ng/mL) or Cobas (1.73 ng/mL) and EIA AMH/MIS ELISA. By ROC analysis each assay displayed similar efficiency for PCOS diagnosis. Sensitivities varied from 49% to 74% when setting the specificity at 92%. Cluster analysis run in the control group identified a subgroup of asymptomatic women with polycystic ovary morphology (PCOM). After exclusion of PCOM, the 95th percentile of controls was 4.2 ng/mL (30 pmol/L) with the automatic assays and 5.6 ng/mL (40 pmol/L) with the manual assays.

CONCLUSION(S): Performance of the different AMH assays for PCOS diagnosis is comparable, providing that different threshold values are used for manual and automatic assays. Measurement of serum AMH level appears as a robust tool for the definition of PCOM.

摘要

目的

确定市场上不同的抗苗勒管激素(AMH)免疫测定法在多囊卵巢综合征(PCOS)诊断中是否具有相同的性能。

设计

在同一实验室对95份血清AMH样本进行了为期3个月的回顾性评估。

地点

学术中心实验室。

患者

48名月经规律且无高雄激素血症的对照女性,以及47名因不孕症前来我科就诊的经典PCOS患者(即高雄激素血症加排卵稀少)。

干预措施

无。

主要观察指标

使用五种商业检测方法测量AMH。通过受试者工作特征分析进行方法比较和诊断性能评估。

结果

Gen II和AL-105i酶联免疫吸附测定法(ELISA)获得的值与EAI AMH/MIS提供的值相似,而自动化检测方法得出的值较低。在Access Dxi(1.35 ng/mL)或Cobas(1.73 ng/mL)与EIA AMH/MIS ELISA之间观察到显著的平均差异。通过ROC分析,每种检测方法在PCOS诊断中显示出相似的效率。当将特异性设定为92%时,敏感性从49%到74%不等。在对照组中进行的聚类分析确定了一组无症状的多囊卵巢形态(PCOM)女性亚组。排除PCOM后,自动化检测方法对照组的第95百分位数为4.2 ng/mL(30 pmol/L),手动检测方法为5.6 ng/mL(40 pmol/L)。

结论

不同的AMH检测方法在PCOS诊断中的性能具有可比性,前提是手动和自动化检测方法使用不同的阈值。血清AMH水平的测量似乎是定义PCOM的有力工具。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验