The aim of acromegaly treatment is to control the disease by suppressing GH hyperactivity and reducing the size or impeding the growth of the pituitary GH secreting mass. Over recent years, many studies have emphasized the role of SS analogs in the treatment of acromegaly. In fact, SS analogs have been demonstrated to be an effective tool not only in the control of GH hypersecretion but also more recently in the control of tumor growth, in a relevant number of acromegalic patients both as primary or adjunctive treatment. In this context, the therapeutic failure of medical treatment with SS analogs needs to be accurately defined particularly when they are used as primary treatment but also when they are given to patients previously operated upon, since other effective therapeutic options are nowadays available. Current definition of resistance to SS analogs is based on their efficacy to control GH and IGF-I. However, due to the emerging significance of the shrinkage effect of SS analogs on pituitary adenomas as well as to the apparent dissociation between this effect and the biochemical effects of treatment with these analogs, an evolution in the concept of SS resistance is likely to be occurring. In this review, we will discuss the biological basis of the discordance between biochemical and volumetric effects of SS analogs, and we will address the intriguing clinical and therapeutic aspects related to a possible redefinition of the resistance to SS analogs.