A simple calculation of the target height

Dommelen, Paula van; Schönbeck, Yvonne; Buuren, Stef van

doi:10.1136/archdischild-2011-301095

Cited by 43 publications

(47 citation statements)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Height velocity SDS was calculated based on the Swiss longitudinal study (19). Midparental height adjusted for gender, assortative mating, and parent-offspring correlations, adapted to the most recent Dutch population reference (26), was expressed as SDS (conditional target HtSDS) (27). BMI SDS was calculated based on the 1980 Dutch nation-wide growth study (28).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The growth response to GH treatment is greater in patients with SHOX enhancer deletions compared to SHOX defects

Donze¹,

Meijer²,

Kant³

et al. 2015

European Journal of Endocrinology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Short stature caused by point mutations or deletions of the short stature homeobox (SHOX) gene (SHOX haploinsufficiency (SHI)) is a registered indication for GH treatment. Patients with a SHOX enhancer deletion (SED) have a similar phenotype, but their response to GH is unknown. It is uncertain if duplications of SHOX or its enhancer (SDUP) cause short stature. This study aimed to describe the clinical characteristics and growth response to GH treatment in patients with aberrations of SHOX and its enhancers. Design: In this retrospective multi-center study (2002( -March 2014 clinical information was available from 130 patients (72 SHI, 44 SED, and 14 SDUP) of whom 52 patients were treated with GH. We evaluated height, sitting height (SH), arm span, dysmorphic features and indicators of the growth response to GH (delta height SDS, height velocity, and index of responsiveness). Results: Patients with SEDs showed similar HtSDS to patients with SHI (K2.3 and K2.6, respectively, PZ0.2), but they were less disproportionate (SH/height ratio SDS 2.0 vs 3.1 (P!0.01) and extremities/trunk ratio 2.57 vs 2.43 (PZ0.03)). The 1st year growth response to GH treatment was significantly greater in prepubertal patients with SEDs than SHI. None of the patients with an SDUP was disproportionate and SDUP cosegregated poorly with short stature; their growth response to GH treatment (nZ3) was similar to the other groups. Conclusions: Patients with SEDs are equally short, but less disproportionate than patients with SHI, and show a greater response to GH.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The growth response to GH treatment is greater in patients with SHOX enhancer deletions compared to SHOX defects

Donze¹,

Meijer²,

Kant³

et al. 2015

European Journal of Endocrinology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The remaining children with an HSDS <-2.0 were classified as having idiopathic short stature [14]. The children were further subclassified into either familial or nonfamilial cases [15,16]. Children with an HSDS ≥-2.0 were classified as ‘nonshort'.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…According to the Dutch guideline for children aged 3.00-9.99 years with short stature [4], an additional workup would be indicated if any of the following criteria applied: (1) HSDS <-2.5; (2) HSDS <-2.0 and dysmorphic features or disproportion; (3) HSDS <-2.0 and HSDS >1.6 SD below THSDS (the original cutoff of 2.0 SD below the THSDS was changed when a new formula of target height was used [16] and the secular change in height had stopped [17]), or (4) HSDS <-2.0 and height deflection (>1.0 SD). Two additional consensus-based criteria have been suggested for primary health care: (5) HSDS >2.5 SD below THSDS and (6) growth deflection irrespective of HSDS [5].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Application of the Dutch, Finnish and British Screening Guidelines in a Cohort of Children with Growth Failure

Stalman

Hellinga

Dommelen³

et al. 2015

Horm Res Paediatr

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aims: To evaluate three guidelines for selecting short children for diagnostic workup in a general pediatric clinic. Methods: All patients (n = 131) aged 3.00-9.99 years who were referred for growth failure to a general pediatric clinic were evaluated for their medical history and growth and examined. All of them underwent the same standardized diagnostic workup. Retrospectively, the criteria for the diagnostic workup from three guidelines (proposed in the Netherlands, Finland and the UK) were applied, and their sensitivity was assessed. A Dutch reference sample (n = 958) was used for calculating population specificity. Results: In 23 patients (17.6%), a pathological cause of their growth failure was found. The sensitivity of the original Dutch, Finnish and British guidelines was 73.9, 78.3 and 56.5% and their specificity 98.5, 83.7 and 95.8%, respectively. When adding recent growth deflection to the Dutch guideline, sensitivity increased to 87%, but specificity decreased markedly (to 87%). Conclusion: The proposed cutoff values for height standard deviation score and distance to target height/mid-parental height, as used in the Netherlands and Finland, are effective for population growth monitoring, and superior to the monitoring algorithm in the UK. Growth deflection irrespective of height is an important sign of acquired growth disorders, but its specificity is too low for population screening.

show abstract

“…This definition is able to correct for regression to the mean. Furthermore, we adjusted the association between catch-up growth and later outcome for the effect of no catch-up growth due to genes (short parents expressed by the SDS TH ) [20]. With this definition of catch-up growth, our study did not find an increased risk of overweight or obesity in young adults born SGA or with a low HC or low weight adjusted for length who have a higher catch-up growth.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 52%

“…Catch-up growth was defined as weight or length or HC or weight-length SDS GA at 1 year of age adjusted for SDS GA at birth. SDS TH was calculated using formulas that adjust for assortative mating and regression to the mean [20]. TH is a term used for the expected height of a child given the heights of the parents.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

The Effect of Early Catch-Up Growth on Health and Well-Being in Young Adults

Dommelen¹,

Pal²,

Gravenhorst³

et al. 2014

Ann Nutr Metab

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: To study the effect of catch-up growth in the 1st year on cognition, health-related quality of life (HRQoL), problem behavior and growth in young adults. Methods: We included individuals without severe complications and born small for gestational age (SGA; n = 228 for weight, n = 203 for length) or with a low head circumference (HC, n = 178) or a low weight adjusted for length (n = 64) in the Collaborative Project on Preterm and SGA Infants. Neonatal growth was standardized (standard deviation scores for gestational age, SDS_GA) according to GA-specific reference charts. Catch-up growth was defined as SDS_GA at 1 year of age adjusted for SDS_GA at birth. Cognition was defined by the Multicultural Capacity Test-Intermediate Level, HRQoL by the London Handicap Scale (LHS) and the Health Utility Index Mark 3 categorized into 4 levels (Multi-Attribute Utility, MAU), and problem behavior by the Young Adult Self-Report. We adjusted for potential confounders. Results: Most adults were born preterm (93.7%). A higher catch-up growth in the 1st year was associated with better cognition (B = 2.57, 95% CI 0.08-5.05 for weight), less disabilities according to the LHS (B = 2.06, 95% CI 0.35-3.78 for HC) and the MAU (OR = 0.67, 95% CI 0.48-0.95 for HC) and higher final height (B = 0.33, 95% CI 0.18-0.47 for weight; B = 0.41, 95% 0.28-0.55 for length, and B = 0.18, 95% CI 0.04-0.33 for HC) in young adulthood. Conclusion: There are long-term benefits of catch-up growth.

show abstract

A simple calculation of the target height

Cited by 43 publications

References 6 publications

The growth response to GH treatment is greater in patients with SHOX enhancer deletions compared to SHOX defects

The growth response to GH treatment is greater in patients with SHOX enhancer deletions compared to SHOX defects

Application of the Dutch, Finnish and British Screening Guidelines in a Cohort of Children with Growth Failure

The Effect of Early Catch-Up Growth on Health and Well-Being in Young Adults

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About