Abstract Book - 26th ESPU Congress, Joint Meeting with ICCS + SPU + AAP/SOU + AAPU + SFU

S12-14

(P)

ANOGENITAL DISTANCE AND INDEX/RINGFINGER RATIO IN BOYS WITH

HPOSPADIAS AND UNDESCENDED TESTIS - NOT SO MUCH DIFFERENCE?

Ursula TONNHOFER

, Marleen VAN DEN HEIJKANT

, Doris HEBESTREIT

and Alexander SPRINGER

1) Medical University Vienna, Department of Pediatric Surgery, Vienna, AUSTRIA - 2) Medical University Vienna,

Department of Urology, Vienna, AUSTRIA - 3) Medical university Vienna, Paediatric Surgery, Vienna, AUSTRIA

PURPOSE

Recent studies show that the anogenital distance (AGD) and the ratio of the index finger to the ring finger (IRFR) (ratio

larger in female than male) is sexually dimorphic. It is believed that this represents different exposure to androgens in

utero. Pathogenesis of hypospadias and undescended testis (UDT) is also closely linked to androgen action during

pregnancy. In this study, we sought to dtermine if there are any differences in infants with hypospadias and UDT and

controls (other type of elective surgery).

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Prior to surgery AGD, anopenile distance, penile length/glans diameter and left and right IRFR were measured using a

standard caliper. Median age was 2.5y (0.01-16yrs). Patients: controls (C) 28, hypospadias/UDT (HU) 40 (mild

hypospadias 18, severe hypospadias (SH) 9 (SIU classification)) and UDT 13.

RESULTS

Mean age C 2.3y (3.1 SD) vs. HU 2.6y (3.3 SD)(n.s.), mean AGD C 3.5cm (1.4 SD) vs. HU 3.5cm (1.3 SD) (n.s.), mean

right IRFR C 0.97 (0.09 SD) vs. HU 0.98 (0.05 SD) (n.s.), Mean left IRFR C 0.98 (0.06 SD) vs. HU 0.96 (0.06 SD) (n.s.).

Subgroup analysis for severe hypospadias: mean age C 2.3y (3.1 SD) vs. SH 3.6y (3.3) (n.s.), mean AGD C 3.5y (1.4

SD) vs. SH 2.6y (1.0 SD) (p=0.04), mean right IRFR C 0.97 (0.09 SD) vs. SH 0.98 (0.04 SD) (n.s.) and mean left IRFR

C 0.98 (0.06) vs. SH 0.94 (0.04 SD) (n.s.).

CONCLUSIONS

In our infant study (mean 2.5y) we could not show significant differences in AGD and IRFR between hypospadias and

UDT patients and controls. However, in severe hypospadias AGD was significantly reduced. In young age groups, IRFR

does not show major variety. Therefore, in infants IRFR is not a suitable parameter for intrauterine androgen exposure.