Pelvic ultrasonography in normal girls and in girls with pubertal precocity
Authors: Buzi F , Pilotta A , Dordoni D , Lombardi A , Zaglio S , Adlard P 
Published: August 2010

This prospective study sought to evaluate the role of pelvic ultrasonography in differentiating between various types of pubertal precocity. A control group of 117 normal girls (aged 1.1‐15.6) was studied and compared with 87 girls with premature sexual maturation (aged 1.1‐9.2y). Of these patients 19 had central precocious puberty (CPP), 48 had isolated premature thelarche (IPT) and 20 had premature adrenarche (IPA) Pelvic ultrasound variables evaluated were: (i) uterus: longitudinal diameter (uterine length), cross‐sectional area (CSA) and fundo‐cervical ratio; and (ii) ovaries: volume and morphology. Ovarian morphology was subdivided in 6 different appearances: solid, microcystic, paucicystic, multicystic, macrocystic, and major isolated cyst. In normal control girls, uterine length and CSA increased with age, although no cut‐off values could be defined between different age ranges, and they were correlated with breast stage; fundo‐cervical ratio was stable through childhood and increased after age 9. Ovarian volume was significantly greater in pubertal girls with breast stage 2 than in those with only pubic and/or axillary hair. There was a clear predominance of solid ovarian appearances in the age range 2‐7, with the multicystic appearance being seen only after age 7, a minority being macrocystic. After age 10 all the different patterns were observed, and after age 13 the frequency of a macrocystic pattern increased. Significantly more mature ovarian appearances were observed in subjects with breast development compared with those without, independently of the presence of pubic hair. Patients with IPT had no significant differences in pelvic ultrasound measurements when compared with age‐matched controls. All the different morphological ovarian appearances were observed in IPT, in contrast to age‐matched controls, where only the less mature patterns (solid, micro‐ and paucicystic) were seen. Patients with CPP had significantly more mature patterns of ovarian morphology compared with age‐matched controls, but did not differ from pubertal pre‐menarcheal controls. Those patients with IPA differed from age‐matched controls only in having significantly greater uterine length and CSA. Comparison of the pelvic ultrasound parameters between patient groups (IPT, CPP, IPA) and age‐matched controls revealed significantly higher values in CPP for uterine length, uterine CSA and ovarian volume. Ovarian volume was also greater in IPT than in IPA. Ovarian morphology was significantly different in patients (IPT, CPP, IPA) compared with age‐matched controls, but none of the ovarian morphological appearances was exclusive to a single condition. In conclusion: (i) pelvic ultrasound parameters increase progressively from birth to maturity, but no clear cut‐off values can be established between age ranges; (ii) pelvic ultrasound variables reach adult values during puberty, with differences in the timing that may reflect geographical variations; (iii) the multicystic ovarian appearance occurs just before the onset of puberty; (iv) pelvic ultrasonography cannot always differentiate clearly between different disturbances of puberty and therefore cannot supersede other observations and investigations in the evaluation of pubertal disorders; and (v) in this study we propose a more detailed pelvic ultrasound terminology that can avoid apparent confusion in defining ovarian ultrasound appearance.