| Literature DB >> 36067143 |
Giulia Rodari1,2, Sophie Guez3, Simona Salera3, Fabio Massimo Ulivieri4, Gianluca Tadini5, Michela Brena5, Eriselda Profka1, Federico Giacchetti1, Maura Arosio1,2, Claudia Giavoli1,2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Delayed puberty is a possible complication of Epidermolysis Bullosa (EB), though the actual incidence is still unknown. In chronic illnesses delayed puberty should be correctly managed since, if untreated, can have detrimental effects on adult height attainment, peak bone mass achievement and psychological health. AIMS AND METHODS: This is a single-centre study on pubertal development, growth and bone status in EB. Auxological, densitometric (areal Bone Mineral Density-aBMD Z-score, Bone Mineral Apparent Density-BMAD Z-score, Trabecular Bone Score-TBS and Bone Strain Index-BSI at Lumbar spine) and body composition data (Total Body DXA scans) were collected. Disease severity was defined according to Birmingham Epidermolysis Bullosa Severity (BEBS) score.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36067143 PMCID: PMC9447886 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0274072
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.752
Auxological and clinical variables.
| CA | Height (SDS) | MPH | Height-MPH | BMI | BEBS | BEBS | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 16.8 | -2.88 | 0.06 | -2.95 | -3.35 | 36.4 | 15.7 |
| (2.6) | (2.24) | (0.94) | (2.03) | (1.92) | (23.1) | (10.8) | |
| 14.9 | -1.10 | -0.08 | -1.15 | -1.69 | 7.5 | 5.4 | |
| (13.9–16.3) | (1.25) | (1.00) | (1.28) | (1.75) | (3.5–17.6) | (4.3) | |
|
| 16.2 | -2.12 | 0.01 | -2.23 | -2.64 | 25.6 | 11.1 |
| (2.5) | (2.05) | (0.94) | (1.95) | (1.99) | (22.4) | (9.9) | |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1Chronological age;
2Mid-parental height;
3Body Mass Index;
4Birmingham Epidermolysis Bullosa Severity
*Dominant Dystrophic Epidermolysis Bullosa, Junctional Epidermolysis Bullosa, Epidermolysis Bullosa Simplex and Kindler EB.
Laboratory data.
| LH | FSH | 17β-oestradiol (ng/L) | total testosterone (ng/mL) | CRP | IGF-I | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 1.3 (0.1–5.3) | 3.0 (2.1) | 12.8 (5–167) | 0.1 (0.04–2.11) | 6.7 (3.6) | -2.63 (-3.05–-1.58) |
| 2.9 (2.0) | 3.4 (1.4) | 19 (5–134) | 3.8 (1.3–6.2) | 0.2 (0.1–1.0) | -1.30 (0.71) | |
|
| 2.4 (0.1–4.6) | 3.2 (1.8) | 59.1 (75.2) | 2.5 (2.5) | 3.7 (0.2–9.0) | -1.81 (1.22) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1Luteinizing hormone,
2follicle stimulating hormone,
3C-reactive protein,
4insulin-like growth factor-I
*Dominant Dystrophic Epidermolysis Bullosa, Junctional Epidermolysis Bullosa, Epidermolysis Bullosa Simplex and Kindler EB.
Densitometric data.
| Lumbar Spine aBMD | Lumbar Spine Z-score (SDS) | Lumbar Spine Z-score BA | BMAD | BMAD | TBS | BSI | TBLH | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 43.0 (6.0) | -3.66 (2.6) | -2.59 (2.14) | 0.186 (0.061) | -2.70 (2.43) | 1.165 (0.154) | 2.21 (0.77) | -2.94 (2.14) |
| 51.8 (9.5) | -1.73 (1.73) | -0.90 (1.51) | 0.200 (0.031) | -1.10 (1.39) | 1.254 (0.118) | 1.87 (0.27) | -1.59 (1.48) | |
|
| 46.8 (8.7) | -2.83 (2.4) | -1.99 (2.05) | 0.192 (0.05) | -1.95 (2.09) | 1.203 (0.144) | 2.07 (0.63) | -2.37 (1.97) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1Areal Bone Mineral Density,
2Bone Age,
3Bone Mineral Apparent Density,
4Trabecular Bone Score,
5Bone Strain Index,
6Total Body Less Head
*Dominant Dystrophic Epidermolysis Bullosa, Junctional Epidermolysis Bullosa, Epidermolysis Bullosa Simplex and Kindler EB
Fig 1Linear regression between Tanner stages and disease severity.
(a) Birmingham Epidermolysis Bullosa Severity (BEBS) score. (b) skin involvement.
Fig 2Linear regression between Tanner stages and auxological variables.
(a) Height (HT) SDS. (b) Body Mass Index (BMI) SDS.
Fig 3Linear regression between Tanner stages and bone mass.
(a) Bone Mineral Apparent Density (BMAD). (b) Trabecular Bone Score (TBS). (c) Bone Strain Index (BSI).
Fig 4Tanner stages and chronological age (years) for patients with Recessive Dystrophic EB (a) and Junctional EB (b).