Serial prolactin sampling as a confirmatory test for true hyperprolactinemia

The research trend of hyperprolactinemia from 2011 to 2023 was analyzed by bibliometrics

The objective of this study is to conduct a bibliometric analysis of research trends in hyperprolactinemia from 2011 to 2023. This analysis aims to provide researchers with insights into the current hotspots and frontiers related to hyperprolactinemia. It is worth noting that there are currently no existing reports on bibliometric analyses of hyperprolactinemia. The Social Science Citation Index (SSCI) and Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) databases of the Web of Science Core Collection were systematically searched for "articles" and "review articles" related to the topic of hyperprolactinemia from 2011 to 2023. VOSviewer was employed to conduct bibliometric analysis, aiming to analyze the research trends in hyperprolactinemia over the past 13 years. A total of 1865 eligible articles were retrieved, with contributions from 9544 scholars representing 83 countries in the field of research. The United States had the highest number of publications, followed by China. The keywords were categorized into six clusters: (1) etiology of hyperprolactinemia and other related endocrine and metabolic diseases. (2) Hyperprolactinemia and mental illness. (3) Diagnosis and management of hyperprolactinemia. (4) Treatment of hyperprolactinemia and prolactinoma. (5) Detection of macroprolactin and macroprolactinemia. (6) Symptoms of male hyperprolactinemia. Over the past 13 years, there has been a consistent and slightly increasing trend in the number of research papers focusing on hyperprolactinemia. The primary areas of research focus are centered around the diagnosis and treatment of hyperprolactinemia caused by antipsychotic drugs or prolactinoma.

The utility of rested prolactin sampling in the evaluation of hyperprolactinaemia

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

Serum prolactin levels may be elevated by venepuncture stress. We investigated the utility of a rested prolactin sample, obtained through an indwelling venous cannula, in preventing the overdiagnosis of hyperprolactinaemia.

METHODS

Patients at our institution undergo serial prolactin sampling, usually over 40 min, when investigating hyperprolactinaemia. We retrospectively reviewed all serial prolactin sampling performed during a 3-year period. Patients with possible medication-induced hyperprolactinaemia and macroprolactin interference were excluded. We assessed the effect of venepuncture-associated stress on hyperprolactinaemia with the main outcome being normalisation of serum prolactin at the end of serial sampling.

RESULTS

Ninety-three patients with documented hyperprolactinaemia (range 360-1690 mU/L) were included in the analysis. Prolactin decreased during serial sampling in 73 patients (78%), suggesting a prevalent effect of venepuncture stress. The final prolactin sample was normal in 50 patients (54%), consistent with stress hyperprolactinaemia rather than pathological hyperprolactinaemia. Patients with a referral prolactin result greater than two times the upper reference limit (URL) were less likely (15%) to have a normal prolactin result on serial sampling. Measurement of a single rested prolactin sample from an indwelling cannula showed the same diagnostic utility as serial sampling.

CONCLUSION

Serum prolactin results are frequently elevated by the stress of venepuncture. Confirmation of pathological hyperprolactinaemia in a rested sample obtained from an indwelling venous cannula is recommended in patients with mild hyperprolactinaemia, particularly when the referral prolactin is less than two times the URL.

The utility of prolactin serial sampling and the best prolactin cut-offs associated with persistent hyperprolactinemia

Background:

A single prolactin sampling is recommended for the diagnosis of hyperprolactinemia. We aimed to study the utility of the prolactin serial sampling and to determine the best cut-offs associated with persistent hyperprolactinemia.

Methods:

Retrospective study of hyperprolactinemic patients [referral prolactin (rPRL)] that underwent prolactin serial samplings. Prolactin at 0 minutes (PRL0′), 20 to 30, and 40 to 60 minutes. The lowest of these last 2 was defined as nadir prolactin (nPRL). Persistent hyperprolactinemia was defined as nPRL above normal. We excluded patients under dopamine receptor agonists. Receiver-operating characteristic (ROC) curves were used to determine the best rPRL and PRL0′ cut-offs predicting persistent hyperprolactinemia.

Results:

We studied 53 patients (3 males). Median rPRL 48.0 ng/mL (39.5–72.5), PRL0′ 34.3 ng/mL (18.0–50.8) and nPRL 29.5 ng/mL (11.4–44.4). PRL0′ was elevated in 35 (66.0%) patients and in 7 of them a normal nPRL was reached; therefore 28 (52.8%) had persistent hyperprolactinemia. The area under curve (AUC) for the association between rPRL and persistent hyperprolactinemia was 0.70 (95%CI: 0.56–0.84); best cut-off: 53.4 ng/mL [sensitivity 53.6%, specificity 80.0%, positive predictive value (PPV) 75.0%, and negative predictive value (NPV) 60.6%]. In the 35 patients with elevated PRL0′, the AUC was 0.92 (95%CI: 0.81–1.00); best cut-off: 35.2 ng/mL (sensitivity 85.7%, specificity 85.7%, PPV 60.0%, and NPV 96.0%).

Conclusions:

Approximately 1/3 of the patients reached a normal PRL0′. In an additional 20%, prolactin normalized after serial samplings. Patients with rPRL >53.4 ng/mL had 75% probability of having persistent hyperprolactinemia and those with PRL0′ <35.2 ng/mL had a 96% probability of not having persistent hyperprolactinemia.