Diagnostic Characteristics and Metabolic Risk Factors of Cases with XXXX during Adolescence.

@entity209 @entity3428 @entity3610 @entity1866
STUDY OBJECTIVE: @entity3610 ( @entity3610 ) is a disorder without definite consensus on its diagnosis and management during adolescence. According to Amsterdam-2012 consensus, as physiological characteristics of adolescence may overlap with @entity3610 signs, it has been indicated that all Rotterdam criteria should be met. In this present study, characteristics of adolescents with different phenotypes who were diagnosed with @entity3610 were evaluated; and presence of differences for metabolic risk factors between phenotypes were investigated. DESIGN: The study was performed on adolescent females. According to phenotypic application models, individuals with all Rotterdam diagnostic criteria [ @entity3428 ( @entity3428 ), polycystic ovarian morphology (PCOM), and chronic anovulation (CA) on the ultrasonography] were in Group 1 (n  =  26); with @entity3428 and CA were in Group 2 (n  =  10); with @entity3428 and PCOM were in Group 3 (n  =  7); and with CA and PCOM were in Group 4 (n  =  10). RESULTS: The most common application complaint (87%) among 53 cases enrolled in the study was @entity1866 , and 57% of cases were not obese. When @entity3610 was evaluated according to phenotypes, it was realized that cases that meet  all 3 diagnostic Rotterdam criteria according to the current recommendation in adolescents. (Group 1) was the most common phenotype. @entity3428 was associated with more @entity209 . CONCLUSION: The close monitoring of adolescents, who have 2 diagnostic criteria is advisable among @entity3610 phenotypes. Potentially Groups 2 and 3 which have @entity3428 , in particular should warrant closer follow-up although they do not meet current diagnostic criteria for adolescents.
