Clinical and Experimental Reproductive Medicine

  • 제36권4호
  • /
  • Pages.255-263
  • /
  • 2009
  • /
  • 2233-8233(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2233-8241(eISSN)
대한생식의학회 (The Korean Society for Reproductive Medicine)
권호 표지

다낭난소증후군 진단시 복식 초음파의 유용성에 관한 연구

Transabdominal Ultrasound Assessment of the Polycystic Ovary Syndrome

  • 정경아 (이화여자대학교 의학전문대학원 산부인과학교실) ;
  • 이운정 (이화여자대학교 의학전문대학원 산부인과학교실) ;
  • 정혜원 (이화여자대학교 의학전문대학원 산부인과학교실)
  • Jeong, Kyung-Ah (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, Ewha Womans University) ;
  • Lee, Woon-Jeong (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, Ewha Womans University) ;
  • Chung, Hye-Won (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, School of Medicine, Ewha Womans University)
  • 발행 : 2009.12.30
PDF 다운로드
⟨ 이전 논문 다음 논문 ⟩

초록

목 적: 한국 가임기 여성의 다낭난소증후군 진단시에 복식 초음파를 이용하는 방법의 유용성과 정확도를 분석하여 국내 다낭난소증후군의 진단 기준 마련에 도움이 되고자 하였다. 연구방법: 이화여자대학교 목동병원에서 선별설문조사를 받은 15~44세 여성 8,793명에서 복식 초음파를 시행한 총 701명 중, 정상 월경을 하면서 안드로겐 과다 및 초음파의 다낭난소 소견이 없는 정상 대조군에서 복식 초음파를 시행한 185명과 초음파 검사 소견을 제외하고 NIH 진단 기준으로 다낭난소증후군을 진단 받은 248명의 환자에서 복식 초음파를 시행한 소견을 ROC (receiver operating characteristic) 곡선 분석하였다. 결 과: 정상 대조군의 평균 연령은 $23.64{\pm}4.26$세로 복식 초음파로 측정된 평균 난소 부피는 $6.03{\pm}1.89\;cm^3$, 평균 난포 개수는 $6.49{\pm}1.93$개였다. 복식 초음파를 진단에 사용할 경우 난소 부피를 이용하면 AURC (area under the ROC curve)가 0.761로 난소 부피>$9\;cm^3$ 기준일 때, 민감도 51.0%, 특이도 91.4%였다. 난포 개수에 대한 AURC는 0.733으로 ${\geq}9$개 기준일 때, 민감도 54.9%, 특이도 87.0%였으며, 난포 개수 ${\geq}10$개 기준일 때, 민감도 53.2%, 특이도 90.4%였다. 복식 초음파로 난소 부피와 난포 개수를 검사하여 다낭난소증후군의 선별 진단에 이용하기에는 부적합하였다. 결 론: 복식 초음파를 이용하여 다낭난소증후군을 진단하는 방법은 유용성과 정확도에서 신뢰할만하지 못하다.

Objective: The objective of the study was to determine the diagnostic performance of transabdominal ultrasound by receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curve analysis, in order to evaluate the usefulness in establishing the diagnosis of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). Methods: Questionnaires were given to 8,793 reproductive women reviewed at Ewha Womans University Mokdong hospital. Ultrasound examinations were performed in 701 women with a transabdominal transducer. Transabdominal ultrasounds were performed in 185 normal control women (normal menstruation without hyperandrogenism or PCO morphology) and 248 PCOS patients according to National Institutes of Health (NIH) PCOS diagnosis criteria. ROC curves were calculated for ovarian volume and follicle number. Results: In normal control group, the mean age were $23.64{\pm}4.26$ years old and the mean ovarian volume and follicle number were $6.03{\pm}1.89\;cm^3$ and $6.49{\pm}1.93$, respectively. The ovarian volume showed an area under the ROC curve (AURC) of 0.761. A ovarian volume decision threshold >$9\;cm^3$ had a sensitivity of 51.0% and a specificity of 91.4% for the diagnosis of PCOS. The follicle number showed an AURC of 0.733. A follicle number decision threshold ${\geq}9$ had a sensitivity of 54.9% and a specificity of 87.0% for the diagnosis of PCOS. A follicle number decision threshold ${\geq}10$ had a sensitivity of 53.2% and a specificity of 90.4%. A follicle number and a ovarian volume did not have a high diagnostic power for screening for PCOS. Conclusion: Our results suggest that transabdominal ultrasound assessment is not effective for the detection of PCOS in young women of reproductive age.

키워드

참고문헌

  1. Stein IF, Leventhal NL. Amenorrhea associated with bilateral polycystic ovaries. Am J Obstet Gynecol 1935; 29: 181-91 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9378(15)30642-6
  2. Azziz R, Woods KS, Reyna R, Key TJ, Knochenhauer ES, Yildiz BO. The prevalence and features of the polycystic ovary syndrome in an unselected population. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2004; 89: 2745-9 https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2003-032046
  3. Hull MG. Ovulation failure and induction. Clin Obstet Gynaecol 1981; 8: 753-85
  4. Legro RS. The genetics of obesity. Lessons for polycystic ovary syndrome. Ann NY Acad Sci 2000; 900: 193-202 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1749-6632.2000.tb06230.x
  5. Ovalle F, Azziz R. Insulin resistance, polycystic ovary syndrome, and type 2 diabetes mellitus. Fertil Steril 2002; 77: 1095-105 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(02)03111-4
  6. Wild S, Pierpoint T, McKeigue P, Jacobs H. Cardiovascular disease in women with polycystic ovary syndrome at longterm follow-up: a retrospective cohort study. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) 2000; 52: 595-600 https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2265.2000.01000.x
  7. Legro RS. Polycystic ovary syndrome and cardiovascular disease: a premature association? Endocr Rev 2003; 24: 302-12 https://doi.org/10.1210/er.2003-0004
  8. Bjercke S, Dale PO, Tanbo T, Storeng R, Ertzeid G, Abyholm T. Impact of insulin resistance on pregnancy complications and outcome in women with polycystic ovary syndrome. Gynecol Obstet Invest 2002; 54: 94-8 https://doi.org/10.1159/000067719
  9. Rotterdam ESHRE/ASRM-Sponsored PCOS consensus workshop group. Revised 2003 consensus on diagnostic criteria and long-term health risks related to polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). Hum Reprod 2004; 19: 41-7 https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deh098
  10. Rotterdam ESHRE/ASRM-Sponsored PCOS Consensus Workshop Group. Revised 2003 consensus on diagnostic criteria and long-term health risks related to polycystic ovary syndrome. Fertil Steril 2004; 81: 19-25
  11. 변은경, 김효정, 오지영, 홍영선, 성연아. 서울지역 여자 대학생에서 다낭성난소증후군의 유병율. 대한내분비학회지 2005; 20: 120-6 https://doi.org/10.3803/jkes.2005.20.2.120
  12. Swanson M, Sauerbrei EE, Cooperberg PL. Medical implications of ultrasonically detected polycystic ovaries. J Clin Ultrasound 1981; 9: 219-22 https://doi.org/10.1002/jcu.1870090504
  13. Campbell S, Goessens L, Goswamy R, Whitehead M. Realtime ultrasonography for determination of ovarian morphology and volume. Lancet 1982; 1: 425-8 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(02)95790-9
  14. Orsini LF, Rizzo N, Calderoni P, Pilu G, Bovicelli L. Ultrasound monitoring of ovarian follicular development: a comparison of real-time and static scanning techniques. J Clin Ultrasound 1983; 11: 207-11 https://doi.org/10.1002/jcu.1870110407
  15. Adams J, Franks S, Polson DW, Mason HD, Abdulwahid N, Tucker M, et al. Multifollicular ovaries: clinical and endocrine features and response to pulsatile gonadotropin releasing hormone. Lancet 1985; 2: 1375-9 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(85)92552-8
  16. Pache TD, Wladimiroff JW, Hop WC, Fauser BC. How to discriminate between normal and polycystic ovaries: transvaginal ultrasound study. Radiology 1992; 183: 421-3
  17. Van Santbrink EJ, Hop WC, Fauser BC. Classifcation of normogonadotropic infertility: polycystic ovaries diagnosed by ultrasound versus endocrine characteristics of polycystic ovary syndrome. Fertil Steril 1997; 67: 452-8 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(97)80068-4
  18. Jonard S, Robert Y, Dewailly D. Revisiting the ovarian volume as a diagnostic criterion for polycystic ovaries. Hum Reprod. 2005; 20: 2893-8 https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dei159
  19. Amer SA, Li TC, Bygrave C, Sprigg A, Saravelos H, Cooke ID. An evaluation of the inter-observer and intra-observer variability of the ultrasound diagnosis of polycystic ovaries. Hum Reprod 2002; 17: 1616-22 https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/17.6.1616
  20. Wild RA, Vesely S, Beebe L, Whitsett T, Owen W. Ferriman Gallwey self-scoring I: performance assessment in women with polycystic ovary syndrome. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2005; 90: 4112-4 https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2004-2243
  21. Balen AH, Laven JS, Tan SL, Dewailly D. Ultrasound assessment of the polycystic ovary: international consensus definitions. Hum Reprod Update 2003; 9: 505-14 https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmg044
  22. Farquhar CM, Birdsall M, Manning P, Mitchell JM, France JT. The prevalence of polycystic ovaries on ultrasound scanning in a population of randomly selected women. Aust NZJ Obstet Gynaecol 1994; 34: 67-72 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1479-828X.1994.tb01041.x
  23. Ardaens Y, Robert Y, Lemaitre L, Fossati P, Dewailly D. Polycystic ovarian disease: contribution of vaginal endosonography and reassessment of ultrasonic diagnosis. Fertil Steril 1991; 55: 1062-8
  24. Fox R, Corrigan E, Thomas PA, Hull MG. The diagnosis of polycystic ovaries in women with oligo-amenorrhoea: predictive power of endocrine tests. Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) 1991; 34:127-31 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2265.1991.tb00282.x
  25. Pavlik EJ, De Priest PD, Gallion HH, Ueland FR, Reedy MB, Kryscio RJ, et al. Ovarian volume related to age. Gynecol Oncol 2000; 77: 410-2 https://doi.org/10.1006/gyno.2000.5783
  26. Duijkers IJ, Klipping C. Polycystic ovaries, as defined by the 2003 Rotterdam consensus criteria, are found to be very common in young healthy women. Gynecol Endocrinol 2009; 15: 1-9 https://doi.org/10.3109/09513590903247824
  27. Porter MB. Polycystic ovary syndrome: the controversy of diagnosis by ultrasound. Semin Reprod Med 2008; 26: 241-51 https://doi.org/10.1055/s-2008-1076143
  28. Kauffman RP, Baker TE, Baker VM, DiMarino P, Castracane VD. Endocrine and metabolic differences among phenotypic expressions of polycystic ovary syndrome according to the 2003 Rotterdam consensus criteria. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2008 ; 198: 670.e1-7 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ajog.2008.01.037
  29. Nardo LG, Gelbaya TA. Evidence-based approach for the use of ultrasound in the management of polycystic ovary syndrome. Minerva Ginecol 2008; 60: 83-9
  30. Escobar-Morreale HF, Asunción M, Calvo RM, Sancho J, San Millán JL. Receiver operating characteristic analysis of the performance of basal serum hormone profiles for the diagnosis of polycystic ovary syndrome in epidemiological studies. Eur J Endocrinol 2001; 145: 619-24 https://doi.org/10.1530/eje.0.1450619