Low testosterone in a male adolescent bodybuilder: Which diagnosis holds more weight?

Reversible male hypogonadotropic hypogonadism due to energy deficit

CONTEXT

Calorie restriction and overtraining are increasingly seen in young men who suffer from increasing societal pressure to attain a perceived ideal male body image. The resulting energy deficit can lead to multiple endocrine consequences, including suppression of the male gonadal axis.

DESIGN

We reviewed the literature, including two unpublished cases.

RESULTS

We identified 23 cases, aged median (range) 20 years (16-33), with a body mass index of 15.9 kg/m² (12.5-20.5). Total testosterone was 3.0 nmol/L (0.6-21.3), and luteinizing hormone (LH) 1.2 mIU/L (<0.2-7.5), with 91% of cases demonstrating hypogonadotropic hypogonadism. Associated findings included evidence of growth hormone resistance (increased growth hormone in 57% and low insulin-like growth factor-1 in 71%), hypercortisolaemia (50%) and a nonthyroidal illness picture (67%). In cases with longitudinal measurements following weight regain, serum testosterone (n = 14) increased from median [interquartile range] 3.2 nmol/L [1.9-5.1] to 14.3 nmol/L [9.3-21.2] (P < 0.001), and LH (n = 8) from 1.2 IU/L [0.8-1.8] to 3.5 IU/L [3.3-4.3] (P = 0.008).

CONCLUSIONS

Hypogonadotropic hypogonadism can occur in the context of energy deprivation in young otherwise healthy men and may be underrecognized. The evidence suggests that gonadal axis suppression and associated hormonal abnormalities represent an adaptive response to increased physiological stress and total body energy deficit. The pathophysiology likely involves hypothalamic suppression due to dysregulation of leptin, ghrelin and pro-inflammatory cytokines. The gonadal axis suppression is functional, because it can be reversible with weight gain. Treatment should focus on reversing the existing energy deficit to achieve a healthy body weight, including psychiatric input where required.

Muscle dysmorphia: current insights

Since 1997, there has been increasing research focusing on muscle dysmorphia, a condition underpinned by people’s beliefs that they have insufficient muscularity, in both the Western and non-Western medical and scientific communities. Much of this empirical interest has surveyed nonclinical samples, and there is limited understanding of people with the condition beyond knowledge about their characteristics. Much of the existing knowledge about people with the condition is unsurprising and inherent in the definition of the disorder, such as dissatisfaction with muscularity and adherence to muscle-building activities. Only recently have investigators started to explore questions beyond these limited tautological findings that may give rise to substantial knowledge advances, such as the examination of masculine and feminine norms. There is limited understanding of additional topics such as etiology, prevalence, nosology, prognosis, and treatment. Further, the evidence is largely based on a small number of unstandardized case reports and descriptive studies (involving small samples), which are largely confined to Western (North American, British, and Australian) males. Although much research has been undertaken since the term “muscle dysmorphia” entered the psychiatric lexicon in 1997, there remains tremendous scope for knowledge advancement. A primary task in the short term is for investigators to examine the extent to which the condition exists among well-defined populations to help determine the justification for research funding relative to other public health issues. A greater variety of research questions and designs may contribute to a broader and more robust knowledge base than currently exists. Future work will help clinicians assist a group of people whose quality of life and health are placed at risk by their muscular preoccupation.

Systematic review of the diagnostic category muscle dysmorphia

OBJECTIVES

(1) To collect, analyze and synthetize the evidence on muscle dysmorphia diagnosis as defined by Pope et al. and (2) To discuss its appropriate nosology and inclusion as a specific category in psychiatric classificatory systems.

METHOD

A systematic search in the MEDLINE, the PsycNET, the LILACS and SciELO databases and in the International Journal of Eating Disorders was conducted looking for articles published between January 1997 and October 2014 and in EMBASE database between January 1997 and August 2013. Only epidemiological and analytical studies were considered for selection. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed according to the Evidence-Based Mental Health and the National Health and Medical Research Council's guidelines. The support for inclusion of muscle dysmorphia in psychiatric classificatory systems was examined against Blashfield et al.'s criteria.

RESULTS

Thirty-four articles were considered eligible out of 5136. Most of the studies were cross-sectional and enrolled small, non-clinical samples. The methodological quality of all selected papers was graded at the lowest hierarchical level due to studies' designs. Forty-one percent of the publications considered the available evidence insufficient to support the inclusion of muscle dysmorphia in any existing category of psychiatric disorders. The current literature does not fulfill Blashfield et al.'s criteria for the inclusion of muscle dysmorphia as a specific entity in psychiatric diagnostic manuals.

CONCLUSION

The current evidence does not ensure the validity, clinical utility, nosological classification and inclusion of muscle dysmorphia as a new disorder in classificatory systems of mental disorders.

Doping in sport and exercise: anabolic, ergogenic, health and clinical issues

The use of doping agents is evident within competitive sport in senior and junior age groups, where they are taken by non-elite as well as elite participants. They are also taken in non-sporting contexts by individuals seeking to ‘improve’ their physique through an increase in muscle and/or decrease in fat mass. While attaining accurate data on the prevalence of their use has limitations, studies suggest the illicit use of doping agents by athletes and non-athletes may be 1–5% in the population and greater than 50% in some groups; with the prevalence being higher in males. There is conclusive evidence that some doping agents are anabolic and ergogenic. There is also evidence that the use of doping agents such as anabolic androgenic steroids, growth hormone and other anabolic agents, erythropoietin and stimulants conveys considerable health risks that include, but are not limited to: cardiovascular disease, diabetes, cancer, mental health issues, virilisation in females and the suppression of naturally produced androgens in males. This review will outline the anabolic, ergogenic and health impacts of selected doping agents and methods that may be used in both the sporting and physique development contexts. It also provides a brief tabulated overview of the history of doping and how doping agents may impact upon the analyses of clinical samples.