Sonographic Evaluation of Polycystic Ovarian Morphology and Its Relationship with Clinical and Metabolic Features in Women of Reproductive Age: A Cross-Sectional Study

Srikanth Maloth; Dr. N. Anil Kumar; Dr. Nagaraju Baja

doi:10.51168/26mvg313

Autori

Srikanth Maloth Assistant Professor, Department of Radiology, Government Medical College/Government General Hospital, Kamareddy, Telangana, India
Dr. N. Anil Kumar Professor, Department of Radiology, Government Medical College/Government General Hospital, Kamareddy, Telangana, India
Dr. Nagaraju Baja Assistant Professor, Department of Radiology, Government Medical College/Government General Hospital, Kamareddy, Telangana, India

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.51168/26mvg313

Cuvinte cheie:

polycystic ovarian morphology, ultrasonography, insulin resistance, hyperandrogenism, ovarian volume, women of reproductive age

Rezumat

Background: Polycystic ovarian morphology (PCOM) is a common ultrasonographic finding in women of reproductive age and can coexist with menstrual, hyperandrogenic, anthropometric, and metabolic abnormalities. Clarifying these relationships is clinically useful because ovarian morphology alone does not establish polycystic ovary syndrome.

Objectives: To determine the frequency and sonographic characteristics of PCOM and assess its relationship with clinical and metabolic features in women of reproductive age.

Methods: This hospital-based cross-sectional study included 100 women aged 18–35 years evaluated at Government Medical College/Government General Hospital, Kamareddy, Telangana, India, from March 2025 to February 2026. Clinical assessment, anthropometry, pelvic ultrasonography, fasting glucose, insulin, lipid profile, and total testosterone were recorded. Women were grouped according to the presence or absence of PCOM, and between-group differences were analyzed.

Results: PCOM was identified in 62.0% of women; 44.0% had bilateral and 18.0% unilateral morphology. Mean ovarian volume and follicle number were significantly higher with PCOM (11.7 ± 2.8 mL and 24.6 ± 5.9) than without PCOM (7.6 ± 1.8 mL and 12.8 ± 3.6). Menstrual irregularity, hirsutism, acne, obesity, and acanthosis nigricans were significantly more frequent in women with PCOM. Fasting insulin, HOMA-IR, triglycerides, and total testosterone were higher, while HDL cholesterol was lower. Insulin resistance occurred in 62.9% versus 28.9%.

Conclusion: PCOM was frequent and was associated with adverse clinical, androgenic, and metabolic characteristics.

Recommendations: Women with PCOM, particularly those with menstrual irregularity, obesity, hyperandrogenic signs, or acanthosis nigricans, should undergo structured metabolic assessment and individualized clinical follow-up.

Biografii autori

Srikanth Maloth, Assistant Professor, Department of Radiology, Government Medical College/Government General Hospital, Kamareddy, Telangana, India

is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Radiology, Government Medical College/Government General Hospital, Kamareddy, Telangana, India. His academic and clinical work is focused on diagnostic radiology, ultrasonography, Doppler imaging, and clinical imaging-based research.
Dr. N. Anil Kumar, Professor, Department of Radiology, Government Medical College/Government General Hospital, Kamareddy, Telangana, India

is a Professor in the Department of Radiology, Government Medical College/Government General Hospital, Kamareddy, Telangana, India. His professional interests include diagnostic radiology, vascular imaging, ultrasonography, medical education, and the supervision of clinical research in radiodiagnosis.
Dr. Nagaraju Baja, Assistant Professor, Department of Radiology, Government Medical College/Government General Hospital, Kamareddy, Telangana, India

is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Radiology, Government Medical College/Government General Hospital, Kamareddy, Telangana, India. His areas of academic and clinical interest include diagnostic radiology, Doppler ultrasonography, vascular imaging, cardiovascular imaging, and research involving imaging-based assessment of cardiovascular risk factors. He is the corresponding author of the present study.

Referințe

1. Stener-Victorin E, Teede H, Norman RJ, Legro R, Goodarzi MO, Dokras A, et al. Polycystic ovary syndrome. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2024;10(1):27.

https://doi.org/10.1038/s41572-024-00511-3

2. Teede HJ, Tay CT, Laven JJE, Dokras A, Moran LJ, Piltonen TT, et al. Recommendations From the 2023 International Evidence-based Guideline for the Assessment and Management of Polycystic Ovary Syndrome. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 2023;108(10):2447-2469. https://doi.org/10.1210/clinem/dgad463

3. Rotterdam ESHRE/ASRM-Sponsored PCOS Consensus Workshop Group. Revised 2003 consensus on diagnostic criteria and long-term health risks related to polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). Hum Reprod. 2004;19(1):41-47 https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deh098

4. Dumesic DA, Oberfield SE, Stener-Victorin E, Marshall JC, Laven JSE, Legro RS. Scientific statement on the diagnostic criteria, epidemiology, pathophysiology, and molecular genetics of polycystic ovary syndrome. Endocr Rev. 2015;36(5):487-525. https://doi.org/10.1210/er.2015-1018

5. Deswal R, Narwal V, Dang A, Pundir CS. The prevalence of polycystic ovary syndrome: a brief systematic review. J Hum Reprod Sci. 2020;13(4):261-271.

https://doi.org/10.4103/jhrs.JHRS_95_18

7. Ganie MA, Rashid A, Sahu D, Nisar S, Wani IA, Khan J. Prevalence of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS) among reproductive age women from Kashmir valley: a cross-sectional study. Int J Gynaecol Obstet. 2020;149(2):231-236. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijgo.13125

8. Azziz R, Carmina E, Chen Z, Dunaif A, Laven JSE, Legro RS, et al. Polycystic ovary syndrome. Nat Rev Dis Primers. 2016;2:16057.

https://doi.org/10.1038/nrdp.2016.57

9. Dewailly D, Lujan ME, Carmina E, Cedars MI, Laven J, Norman RJ, Escobar-Morreale HF. Definition and significance of polycystic ovarian morphology: a task force report from the Androgen Excess and Polycystic Ovary Syndrome Society. Hum Reprod Update. 2014;20(3):334-352.

https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmt061

10. Pea J, Bryan J, Wan C, Oldfield AL, Ganga K, Carter FE, Johnson LM, Lujan ME. Ultrasonographic criteria in the diagnosis of polycystic ovary syndrome: a systematic review and diagnostic meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2024;30(1):109-130. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmad027

11. Christ JP, Cedars MI. Current guidelines for diagnosing PCOS. Diagnostics (Basel). 2023;13(6):1113. https://doi.org/10.3390/diagnostics13061113

12. Moghetti P, Tosi F. Insulin resistance and PCOS: chicken or egg? J Endocrinol Invest. 2021;44(2):233-244. doi:10.1007/s40618-020-01351-0.

https://doi.org/10.1007/s40618-020-01351-0

13. Diamanti-Kandarakis E, Dunaif A. Insulin resistance and the polycystic ovary syndrome revisited: an update on mechanisms and implications. Endocr Rev. 2012;33(6):981-1030. https://doi.org/10.1210/er.2011-1034

14. Tripathy P, Sahu A, Sahu M, Nagy A. Metabolic risk assessment of Indian women with polycystic ovarian syndrome in relation to four Rotterdam criteria based phenotypes. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2018;224:60-65. doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2018.02.031.