Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Review
. 2012 Feb;19(1):47-52.
doi: 10.1097/MED.0b013e32834ec952.

Diagnosis of growth hormone deficiency in childhood

Affiliations
Review

Diagnosis of growth hormone deficiency in childhood

Takara Stanley. Curr Opin Endocrinol Diabetes Obes. 2012 Feb.

Abstract

Purpose of review: The diagnosis of growth hormone deficiency (GHD) in childhood is challenging, in large part because of the lack of a true gold standard and the relatively poor performance of available diagnostic testing. This review discusses the recent literature on this topic.

Recent findings: Auxology and clinical judgment remain the foundation for the diagnosis of GHD. Provocative growth hormone testing is poorly reproducible, dependent on factors such as body composition and pubertal status, and further limited by significant variability among commercially available growth hormone assays. Measurement of insulin-like growth factor I and insulin-like growth factor-binding protein 3 is not diagnostically useful in isolation but is helpful in combination with other diagnostic measures. Neuroimaging is also useful to inform diagnosis, as pituitary abnormalities suggest a higher likelihood of GHD persisting into adulthood. Although genetic testing is not routinely performed in the diagnosis of GHD at the present time, multiple recent reports raise the possibility that it may play a more important role in diagnosing GHD in the future.

Summary: Beyond physicians' integrated assessment of auxology, clinical presentation, and bone age, current tools to diagnose GHD are suboptimal. Recent literature emphasizes the need to reappraise our current practice and to consider new tools for diagnosis.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The author has no conflicts of interest.

Similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. Lindsay R, Feldkamp M, Harris D, Robertson J, Rallison M. Utah Growth Study: growth standards and the prevalence of growth hormone deficiency. J Pediatr. 1994;125(1):29–35. - PubMed
    1. Rona RJ, Tanner JM. Aetiology of idiopathic growth hormone deficiency in England and Wales. Arch Dis Child. 1977;52(3):197–208. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Vimpani GV, Vimpani AF, Lidgard GP, Cameron EH, Farquhar JW. Prevalence of severe growth hormone deficiency. Br Med J. 1977;2(6084):427–430. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Bao XL, Shi YF, Du YC, Liu R, Deng JY, Gao SM. Prevalence of growth hormone deficiency of children in Beijing. Chin Med J (Engl) 1992;105(5):401–405. - PubMed
    1. Consensus guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of growth hormone (GH) deficiency in childhood and adolescence: summary statement of the GH Research Society. GH Research Society. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2000;85(11):3990–3993. - PubMed

Publication types

Substances