Abstract
Distinguishing between self limited delayed puberty (SLDP) and congenital hypogonadotropic hypogonadism (CHH) may be tricky as they share clinical and biochemical characteristics. and appear to lie within the same clinical spectrum. However, one is classically transient (SDLP) while the second is typically a lifetime condition (CHH). The natural history and long-term outcomes of these two conditions differ significantly and thus command distinctive approaches and management. Because the first presentation of SDLP and CHH is very similar (delayed puberty with low LH and FSH and low sex hormones), the scientific community is scrambling to identify diagnostic tests that can allow a correct differential diagnosis among these two conditions, without having to rely on the presence or absence of phenotypic red flags for CHH that clinicians anyway seem to find hard to process. Despite the heterogeneity of genetic defects so far reported in DP, genetic analysis through next-generation sequencing technology (NGS) had the potential to contribute to the differential diagnostic process between SLDP and CHH. In this review we will provide an up-to-date overview of the genetic architecture of these two conditions and debate the benefits and the bias of performing genetic analysis seeking to effectively differentiate between these two conditions.