Eur J Endocrinol
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


DOI: 10.1530/eje.0.151U101
European Journal of Endocrinology, Vol 151, Suppl_3, U101-U108
Copyright © 2004 by European Society of Endocrinology
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Carel, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Carel, J.

Articles

Can we increase adolescent growth?

JC Carel

Department of Pediatric Endocrinology and INSERM U561, Groupe Hospitalier Cochin-Saint Vincent de Paul and Faculte Cochin-Universite Paris V, Paris, France. carel@paris5.inserm.fr

Adolescent growth represents 15-20% of adult height and has been the focus of several treatment interventions, aiming at increasing the amplitude of the adolescent spurt. Importantly, pre- and early puberty are times when patients and families seek medical help and when estimates of adult height are more accurate than in younger children. We review the current approaches aimed at increasing pubertal growth in short children and knowledge about their results and risks. GnRH agonists, when used outside the context of precocious puberty, induce a modest gain (4 cm) when they are used for more than 3 years. Their effects on bone mass, body composition and possibly on psychosocial parameters limit their use. Several trials have now shown that GH can increase adult height of short adolescents with idiopathic short stature or born small for gestational age. However, the amplitude of the effect is modest and of dubious clinical significance. Lastly, the association of both approaches is rather popular among pediatric endocrinologists but still lacks a definite demonstration of its efficacy. In conclusion, we have gained insight in the median effects of some of these treatments and overoptimistic initial expectations are now refocused. However, we still have a long way to go before we truly evaluate the factors affecting the variable individual responses to these treatments, their clinical significance and their cost-benefit balance.





HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 2004 European Society of Endocrinology.