help button home button Endocrine Society JCEM
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH

This version published online on March 24, 2009
Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism , doi:10.1210/jc.2008-2123
This Article
Right arrow Author Manuscript (PDF)
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
94/6/2009    most recent
Author Manuscript (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a related Letter to the Editor
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
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
Right arrow Request Copyright Permission
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Nabhan, Z. M.
Right arrow Articles by Eugster, E. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Nabhan, Z. M.
Right arrow Articles by Eugster, E. A.

Submitted on September 29, 2008
Accepted on March 18, 2009

Conjugated Oral Versus Transdermal Estrogen Replacement in Girls with Turner Syndrome: A Pilot Comparative Study

Zeina M. Nabhan MD, MS*, Linda A. DiMeglio MD, MPH, Rong Qi MS, Susan M. Perkins PhD, and Erica A. Eugster MD

Section of Pediatric Endocrinology/Diabetology, James Whitcomb Riley Hospital for Children, & Division of Biostatistics, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, IN

* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: znabhan{at}iupui.edu.

Background: The optimal route of estrogen replacement in Turner syndrome (TS) is unknown.

Objective: To compare conjugated oral versus transdermal estrogen (TD E2) on bone accrual, uterine growth, pubertal development, IGF-1, and lipids in girls with TS.

Methods: Prepubertal growth hormone (GH) treated girls ≥10 yrs with TS were eligible. Subjects were randomized to conjugated oral estrogen or TD E2 for one year. Assessments included DXA, pelvic ultrasound, Tanner staging, growth velocity, IGF-1, and lipid profile.

Results: Twelve girls (14.0 ± 1.7 yrs) were enrolled. TD E2 resulted in a significantly greater change in spine bone density at 12 months compared with conjugated oral estrogen; (BMC 9.0 ± 0.9 g vs. 5.8 ± 0.9 g, p = 0.04; BMD 0.12 ± 0.01 g/cm2 vs. 0.06 ± 0.01 g/cm2, p = 0.004; Z-score 0.7 ± 0.1 vs. 0.3 ± 0.1, p = 0.03). Greater increases in uterine length (4.13 ± 0.39 cm vs. 1.98 ± 0.39 cm, p = 0.003) and volume (22.2 ± 4.4 cc vs. 4.0 ± 4.4 cc, p = 0.02) were also found in the TD vs. the oral group at one year. At study end, 66% of subjects in the TD group had a mature uterus vs. 0% in the oral group. No significant differences in other parameters examined were seen.

Conclusion: In girls with TS, TD E2 resulted in faster bone accrual at the spine and increased uterine growth compared with conjugated oral estrogen. This pilot study provides preliminary information for optimizing estrogen replacement in this population.


Key words: Turner syndrome • estrogen replacement • bone density • uterine growth







HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH
Endocrinology Endocrine Reviews J. Clin. End. & Metab.
Molecular Endocrinology Recent Prog. Horm. Res. All Endocrine Journals
Copyright © 2009 by The Endocrine Society