The External Genitalia Score (EGS): A European Multicenter Validation Study

CONTEXT: Standardized description of external genitalia is needed in the assessment of children with atypical genitalia. OBJECTIVES: To validate the External Genitalia Score (EGS), to present reference values for preterm and term babies up to 24 months and correlate obtained scores with anogenital distances (AGDs). DESIGN, SETTING: A European multicenter (n = 8) validation study was conducted from July 2016 to July 2018. PATIENTS AND METHODS: EGS is based on the external masculinization score but uses a gradual scale from female to male (range, 0-12) and terminology appropriate for both sexes. The reliability of EGS and AGDs was determined by the interclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Cross-sectional data were obtained in 686 term babies (0-24 months) and 181 preterm babies, and 111 babies with atypical genitalia. RESULTS: The ICC of EGS in typical and atypical genitalia is excellent and good, respectively. Median EGS (10th to 90th centile) in males < 28 weeks gestation is 10 (8.6-11.5); in males 28-32 weeks 11.5 (9.2-12); in males 33-36 weeks 11.5 (10.5-12) and in full-term males 12 (10.5-12). In all female babies, EGS is 0 (0-0). The mean (SD) lower/upper AGD ratio (AGDl/u) is 0.45 (0.1), with significant difference between AGDl/u in males 0.49 (0.1) and females 0.39 (0.1) and intermediate values in differences of sex development (DSDs) 0.43 (0.1). The AGDl/u correlates with EGS in males with typical genitalia and in atypical genitalia. CONCLUSIONS: EGS is a reliable and valid tool to describe external genitalia in premature and term babies up to 24 months. EGS correlates with AGDl/u in males. It facilitates standardized assessment, clinical decision-making and multicenter research

The External Genitalia Score (EGS): A European multicenter validation study.

CONTEXT Standardized description of external genitalia is needed in the assessment of children with atypical genitalia. OBJECTIVES To validate the External Genitalia Score (EGS), to present reference values for preterm and term babies up to 24 months and correlate obtained scores with anogenital distances (AGDs). DESIGN, SETTING A European multicentre (n=8) validation study was conducted from 07/2016 until 07/2018. PATIENTS AND METHODS EGS is based on the external masculinization score but uses a gradual scale from female to male (range 0-12) and terminology appropriate for both sexes. The reliability of EGS and AGD's were determined by the interclass correlation coefficient (ICC). Cross-sectional data were obtained in 686 term (0-24 months), and 181 preterm babies and 111 babies with atypical genitalia. RESULTS ICC of EGS in typical and atypical genitalia is excellent and good. Median EGS (10th - 90th centile) in males < 28 weeks gestation is 10 (8.6-11.5); in males 28-32 weeks 11.5 (9.2-12); in males 33-36 weeks 11.5 (10.5-12) and in full-term males 12 (10.5-12). In all female babies, EGS is 0 (0-0). The mean (SD) AGDl/u is 0.45 (0.1), with significant difference between AGDl/u in males 0.49 (0.1) and females 0.39 (0.1) and in-between values in DSD 0.43 (0.1). AGDl/u correlates with EGS in males with typical genitalia and in atypical genitalia. CONCLUSIONS EGS is a reliable and valid tool to describe external genitalia in premature and term babies up to 24 months. EGS correlates with AGDl/u in males. It facilitates standardized assessment, clinical decision-making and multicenter research

Validation of prediction models for near adult height in children with idiopathic growth hormone deficiency treated with growth hormone: A belgian registry study

Background/Aim: To validate prediction models for near final adult height (nFAH) by Ranke et al. [Horm Res Paediatr 2013;79:51-67]. Methods: Height data of 127 (82 male) idiopathic growth hormone (GH)-deficient children, treated with GH until nFAH, were retrieved from the database of the Belgian Society for Pediatric Endocrinology and Diabetology (BESPEED). nFAH was predicted after first-year GH treatment, applying prediction models by Ranke et al. Bland-Altman plots and Clarke error grid analyses were performed to assess clinical significance of the differences between observed and predicted nFAH. Results: In males, the predicted nFAH was higher than the observed nFAH (difference: 0.2 ± 0.7 SD; p < 0.01). In females, there was no significant difference. Bland-Altman analyses showed that the means of the differences between observed and predicted nFAH were close but not equal to zero, with overprediction for smaller heights and underprediction for taller heights. Clarke error grid analysis: in males, 59-61% of the predicted nFAH were within 0.5 SDS and 88% within 1.0 SDS from the observed nFAH; in females, 40-44% of the predicted nFAH were within 0.5 SDS and 76-78% within 1.0 SDS from the observed nFAH. Conclusion: Ranke's models accurately predicted nFAH in females and overpredicted nFAH in males by about 1.5 cm. In most individuals, the predicted nFAH was within 1 SDS of observed nFAH. These models can be of help in giving realistic expectations of adult height.SCOPUS: ar.jinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishe