» Articles » PMID: 24672166

The Combined Use of Antimullerian Hormone and Age to Predict the Ovarian Response to Controlled Ovarian Hyperstimulation in Poor Responders: A Novel Approach

Overview
Date 2014 Mar 28
PMID 24672166
Citations 4
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Context: Reduced ovarian response to stimulation represents one of the most intractable problems in infertility treatment. As failed cycle can cause considerable amount of emotional and economical loss, there are various attempts made to predict ovarian response.

Aims: To evaluate different factors influencing outcome of assisted reproduction in women with predicted reduced response (antimullerian hormone between 1 and 5 pmol/L) and to develop a model using of AMH and age to predict the number of oocytes in poor responders.

Settings And Design: Retrospective study in a teaching hospital.

Materials And Methods: We analyzed 85 cycles (57 women) with predicted reduced response with serum AMH value between 1 and 5 pmol/L. Standard ovarian stimulation protocol was used. Primary outcome measures were clinical pregnancy rates and oocytes retrieved.

Statistical Analysis Used: Data were analyzed using Microsoft excel and MetlabR software.

Results: Clinical pregnancy rate/ET was 20.33%, in this group. AMH and age was analyzed using linear regression model which produced an equation to give predicted oocyte count if AMH and age are known. (Oocytes = age × (-ß) + Serum AMH × α) (Constant ß=0.0102 and α = 1.0407).

Conclusions: Combined use of serum AMH and age to predict ovarian response within reduced responder group should be further evaluated. For first time, we suggested combining both factors to predict ovarian response using a simple equation which allow developing tailored strategy.

Citing Articles

The usefulness of peri-trigger female reproductive hormones (delta-FRH) in predicting oocyte maturation in normal ovarian reserve patients who received fertilization-embryo transfer: a retrospective study.

He L, Xu Q, Wan F, Hao L, Qiu Y, Ran X PeerJ. 2024; 12:e17706.

PMID: 39006021 PMC: 11246619. DOI: 10.7717/peerj.17706.


Does Adenomyosis Influence ICSI Clinical Outcome? A Systematic Analysis and Impact of GnRH Agonist Pretreatment for Women with Adenomyosis in ICSI-FET Cycle: A Retrospective Cohort Study.

Sudhakar P, Manivannan S, Kandasamy D, Jayapal K J Obstet Gynaecol India. 2022; 72(3):236-242.

PMID: 35734352 PMC: 9206983. DOI: 10.1007/s13224-021-01504-y.


Comparison of modified agonist, mild-stimulation and antagonist protocols for in vitro fertilization in patients with diminished ovarian reserve.

Yu R, Jin H, Huang X, Lin J, Wang P J Int Med Res. 2018; 46(6):2327-2337.

PMID: 29695208 PMC: 6023056. DOI: 10.1177/0300060518770346.


Efficacy of growth hormone supplementation with gonadotrophins in vitro fertilization for poor ovarian responders: an updated meta-analysis.

Yu X, Ruan J, He L, Hu W, Xu Q, Tang J Int J Clin Exp Med. 2015; 8(4):4954-67.

PMID: 26131068 PMC: 4483949.

References
1.
Sallam H, Ezzeldin F, Agameya A, Abdel-Rahman A, El-Garem Y . The definition of 'poor response': Bologna criteria. Hum Reprod. 2011; 27(2):626-7. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/der398. View

2.
Pal L, Santoro N . Age-related decline in fertility. Endocrinol Metab Clin North Am. 2003; 32(3):669-88. DOI: 10.1016/s0889-8529(03)00046-x. View

3.
Verhagen T, Hendriks D, Bancsi L, Mol B, Broekmans F . The accuracy of multivariate models predicting ovarian reserve and pregnancy after in vitro fertilization: a meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2008; 14(2):95-100. DOI: 10.1093/humupd/dmn001. View

4.
Fleming R, Deshpande N, Traynor I, Yates R . Dynamics of FSH-induced follicular growth in subfertile women: relationship with age, insulin resistance, oocyte yield and anti-Mullerian hormone. Hum Reprod. 2006; 21(6):1436-41. DOI: 10.1093/humrep/dei499. View

5.
Nelson S, Messow M, Michael Wallace A, Fleming R, McConnachie A . Nomogram for the decline in serum antimüllerian hormone: a population study of 9,601 infertility patients. Fertil Steril. 2010; 95(2):736-41.e1-3. DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.08.022. View