Evaluation des pratiques de commande des tests de prolactine

Zouari Amel Dhouha; Rim Marrakchi; Charfi Ameni; Rabah Mohamed Ccaher; Mariem Boudaya; Kamel Jamoussi; Mohamed Abid; Mouna Turki1

doi:10.1530/endoabs.99.EP1218

EP1218

Prev Next

Section Contents Cite

Endocrine Abstracts (2024) 99 EP1218 | DOI: 10.1530/endoabs.99.EP1218

ECE2024 Eposter Presentations Pituitary and Neuroendocrinology (214 abstracts)

Evaluation des pratiques de commande des tests de prolactine

Dhouha Zouari ¹ , Rim Marrakchi ¹ , Charfi Ameni ¹ , Mohamed Ccaher Rabah ¹ , Mariem Boudaya ¹ , Kamel Jamoussi ¹ , Mohamed Abid ² & Mouna Turki ^1,2

Err

Author affiliations

¹Laboratory of Biochemistry, Hédi-Chaker Hospital, Sfax, Tunisia, ²Endocrinology departement, Hedi Chaker Sfax Tunisie

Introduction: Hyperprolactinaemia can be caused by physiological changes, medications, pathological conditions, or can be idiopathic. The aim of this study was to evaluate clinicians's practice in ordering prolactin (PRL) test.MethodsA retrospective study concerning 75 prolactin requests data collected by the laboratory computer system (Health Lab) during January 2024. We collected age, sex and ordering's origins. PRL tests were performed based on electrochemiluminescence immunoassay (eCLIA) by Dxi600® Beckman Coulter. Hyperprolactinaemia was defined by PRL levels above 25ng/ml and 15ng/ml respectively for women and for men.

Results: The mean age of patients was 37 years, with extremes ranging from 13 to 85 years with a male/female sex ratio of 0.3. The majority of PRL requests were from the endocrinology department (58.7%), followed by the gynecology department (18.7%) and the psychiatry department (13.3%). Reasons for prescription PRL were mainly as follows: 22% for gynecological reasons (primary and secondary amenorrhea, irregular cycle, galactorrhoea, metrorrhagia, spaniomenorrhea, infertility…), 19% for suspecting pituitary tumour, 17% for monitoring hyperprolactinemia, 10% for investigating polycystic ovary syndrome, 8% for monitoring subjects receiving neuroleptics. We observed 37.3% of the requests without clinical indications. The mean of PRL levels was 27 ng/ml, with extreme values ranging from 1.8ng/ml to 196.15 ng/ml. Among requests with clinical indications of having hyperprolactinaemia and requests without clinical indications, only 29.4%, and 28.6% had respectively hyperprolactinaemia.

Conclusion: There was an over-ordering for prolactin in our hospital practice. Further evaluation is needed to determine strategies that can reduce excessive prolactin testing.