Clinical characterization of patients with macroprolactinemia and monomeric hyperprolactinemia

Abstract Macroprolactinemia is often a cause of misdiagnosis, unnecessary expensive investigation, and unsuitable treatment. The aim of the present study was to investigate the clinical findings and the concentrations of macroprolactin in patients with hyperprolactinemia in our region. Eighty-four f...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:The Kaohsiung journal of medical sciences 2011-05, Vol.27 (5), p.173-176
Main Authors: Can, Murat, Guven, Berrak, Atmaca, Hulusi, Ackgoz, Serefden, Mungan, Gorkem
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Adult
Amenorrhea - diagnosis
Diagnosis, Differential
Diagnostic Errors
Female
Galactorrhea
Galactorrhea - diagnosis
Humans
Hyperprolactinemia
Hyperprolactinemia - blood
Hyperprolactinemia - diagnosis
Internal Medicine
Luminescent Measurements
Macroprolactinemia
Oligomenorrhea - diagnosis
Oligomenorrhea/amenorrhea
Prolactin - blood
Young Adult
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Request full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:Abstract Macroprolactinemia is often a cause of misdiagnosis, unnecessary expensive investigation, and unsuitable treatment. The aim of the present study was to investigate the clinical findings and the concentrations of macroprolactin in patients with hyperprolactinemia in our region. Eighty-four female hyperprolactinemic patients were screened for macroprolactinemia. Prolactin was measured by chemiluminesans method on an Immulite 2000 analyzer (Siemens Health Diagnostics, Deerfield, IL, USA). Recoveries less than or equal to 40% after polyethylene glycol precipitation were indicative of macroprolactinemia. Clinical features and biochemical values were compared in true hyperprolactinemic and macroprolactinemic patients. Macroprolactinemia was detected in 31 patients (36.9%), with 84 hyperprolactinemic female patients. There was no difference in frequency of galactorrhea and oligomenorrhea/amenorrhea between the two groups. When we evaluated the clinical features of patients according to prolactin levels, no significant difference was found between the groups. In conclusion, our initial data show that no clinical features could reliably differentiate macroprolactinemic from true hyperprolactinemic patients, but at least one of these symptoms was present in most macroprolactinemic patients.
ISSN:1607-551X
2410-8650
DOI:10.1016/j.kjms.2010.07.002