Evaluating the efficacy of anti-Müllerian hormone as a predictor of ovarian reserve and fertility treatment success
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.18203/2320-1770.ijrcog20250167Keywords:
Anti-müllerian hormone, Antral follicle count, Clinical pregnancy, Fertility treatment, Ovarian reserveAbstract
Background: Ovarian reserve assessment is crucial for predicting fertility treatment outcomes, with Anti-Müllerian Hormone (AMH) emerging as a key biomarker. This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of AMH as a predictor of ovarian reserve and its correlation with fertility treatment success among women in Bangladesh.
Methods: This retrospective study analyzed medical records of 100 women aged 20-40 years who underwent fertility treatment at a specialized clinic in Bangladesh over five years. AMH levels were measured using VIDAS and ovarian reserve was assessed via antral follicle count (AFC) using transvaginal ultrasound. The correlation between AMH levels, AFC, oocytes retrieved and clinical pregnancy rates was analyzed using Pearson's correlation coefficient with statistical software SPSS 26.
Results: The study found a significant positive correlation between AMH levels and AFC, with 80% of women with high AMH levels also having a high AFC. Additionally, women with high AMH levels had higher oocyte retrieval rates and clinical pregnancy rates (70%) compared to those with medium (50%) and low AMH levels (29.4%). The nearly equal distribution of clinical pregnancy outcomes (49% achieving pregnancy) highlighted the varied success of fertility treatments in this population.
Conclusions: AMH is a valuable predictor of ovarian reserve and fertility treatment outcomes, particularly when combined with AFC and other patient-specific factors. This study supports the use of AMH in clinical settings to enhance individualized fertility treatment strategies, potentially improving success rates.
Metrics
References
Broekmans FJ, Kwee J, Hendriks DJ, Mol BW, Lambalk CB. A systematic review of tests predicting ovarian reserve and IVF outcome. Human Reproduction Update. 2006;12(6):685–718. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dml034
Durlinger ALL, Gruijters MJG, Kramer P, Karels B, Ingraham HA, Nachtigal MW, et al. Anti-Müllerian hormone inhibits initiation of primordial follicle growth in the mouse ovary. Endocrinol. 2002;143(3):1076–84. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1210/endo.143.3.8691
Weenen C, Laven JSE, von Bergh ARM, Cranfield M, Groome NP, Visser JA, et al. Anti‐Müllerian hormone expression pattern in the human ovary: potential implications for initial and cyclic follicle recruitment. Mole Human Reprod. 2004;10(2):77–83. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/molehr/gah015
Anderson RA, Nelson SM, Wallace WHB. Measuring anti-Müllerian hormone for the assessment of ovarian reserve: When and for whom is it indicated? Maturitas. 2012;71(1):28–33. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.maturitas.2011.11.008
de Vet A, Laven JSE, de Jong FH, Themmen APN, Fauser BCJM. Antimüllerian hormone serum levels: a putative marker for ovarian aging. Fertility and Sterility. 2002;77(2):357–62. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(01)02993-4
van Rooij IAJ, Broekmans FJM, Scheffer GJ, Looman CWN, Habbema JDF, de Jong FH, et al. Serum antimüllerian hormone levels best reflect the reproductive decline with age in normal women with proven fertility: A longitudinal study. Fertility and Sterility. 2005;83(4):979–87. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2004.11.029
van Disseldorp J, Lambalk CB, Kwee J, Looman CWN, Eijkemans MJC, Fauser BC, et al. Comparison of inter- and intra-cycle variability of anti-Müllerian hormone and antral follicle counts. Human Reprod. 2010;25(1):221–7. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dep366
Loh JS, Maheshwari A. Anti-Müllerian hormone—is it a crystal ball for predicting ovarian ageing. Human Reproduction. 2011;26(11):2925–32. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/der271
Nelson SM. Biomarkers of ovarian response: current and future applications. Fertility and Ster. 2013;99(4):963–9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.11.051
Yong PYK, Baird DT, Thong KJ, McNeilly AS, Anderson RA. Prospective analysis of the relationships between the ovarian follicle cohort and basal FSH concentration, the inhibin response to exogenous FSH and ovarian follicle number at different stages of the normal menstrual cycle and after pituitary down‐regulation. Human Reprod. 2003;18(1):35–44. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deg019
Welt CK, McNicholl DJ, Taylor AE, Hall JE. Female Reproductive Aging Is Marked by Decreased Secretion of Dimeric Inhibin1. J Clin Endocrinol Metabol. 1999;84(1):105–11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1210/jcem.84.1.5381
Seifer DB, MacLaughlin DT, Christian BP, Feng B, Shelden RM. Early follicular serum müllerian-inhibiting substance levels are associated with ovarian response during assisted reproductive technology cycles. Fertility and Sterility. 2002;77(3):468–71. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(01)03201-0
Nelson SM, Yates RW, Fleming R. Serum anti-Müllerian hormone and FSH: prediction of live birth and extremes of response in stimulated cycles—implications for individualization of therapy. Human Reprod. 2007;22(9):2414–21. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dem204
La Marca A, Nelson SM, Sighinolfi G, Manno M, Baraldi E, Roli L, et al. Anti-Müllerian hormone-based prediction model for a live birth in assisted reproduction. Reproductive BioMedicine. 2011;22(4):341–9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rbmo.2010.11.005
Brougham MFH, Crofton PM, Johnson EJ, Evans N, Anderson RA, Wallace WHB. Anti-Müllerian Hormone Is a Marker of Gonadotoxicity in Pre- and Postpubertal Girls Treated for Cancer: A Prospective Study. The J Clin Endocrinol & Metabolism. 2012;97(6):2059–67. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1210/jc.2011-3180
Kok HS, van Asselt KM, van der Schouw YT, Peeters PHM, Wijmenga C. Genetic studies to identify genes underlying menopausal age. Human Reproduction Update. 2005;11(5):483–93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmi024
Lukaszuk K, Liss J, Kunicki M, Jakiel G, Wasniewski T, Woclawek-Potocka I, et al. Anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) is a strong predictor of live birth in women undergoing assisted reproductive technology. Reprod Biol. 2014;14(3):176–81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.repbio.2014.03.004
Moslehi N, Shab-Bidar S, Ramezani Tehrani F, Mirmiran P, Azizi F. Is ovarian reserve associated with body mass index and obesity in reproductive aged women? A meta-analysis. Menopause. 2018;25(9):1046. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/GME.0000000000001116
Sahmay S, Demirayak G, Guralp O, Ocal P, Senturk LM, Oral E, et al. Serum Anti-müllerian hormone, follicle stimulating hormone and antral follicle count measurement cannot predict pregnancy rates in IVF/ICSI cycles. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2012;29(7):589–95. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-012-9754-6
Broer SL, Dolleman M, Opmeer BC, Fauser BC, Mol BW, Broekmans FJM. AMH and AFC as predictors of excessive response in controlled ovarian hyperstimulation: a meta-analysis. Human Reproduction Update. 2011;17(1):46–54. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dmq034
Kotanidis L, Nikolettos K, Petousis S, Asimakopoulos B, Chatzimitrou E, Kolios G, et al. The use of serum anti-Mullerian hormone levels and antral follicle count (AFC) to predict the number of oocytes collected and availability of embryos for cryopreservation in IVF. J Endocrinol Invest. 2016;39(12):1459–64. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40618-016-0521-x
Sahmay S, Guralp O, Aydogan B, Cepni I, Oral E, Irez T. Anti-Müllerian hormone and polycystic ovary syndrome: assessment of the clinical pregnancy rates in in vitro fertilization patients. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2013;29(5):440–3. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3109/09513590.2013.769519
Mutlu MF, Erdem M, Erdem A, Yildiz S, Mutlu I, Arisoy O, et al. Antral follicle count determines poor ovarian response better than anti-müllerian hormone but age is the only predictor for live birth in in vitro fertilization cycles. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2013;30(5):657–65. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-013-9975-3
Liao S, Xiong J, Tu H, Hu C, Pan W, Geng Y, et al. Prediction of in vitro fertilization outcome at different antral follicle count thresholds combined with female age, female cause of infertility and ovarian response in a prospective cohort of 8269 women. Medicine. 2019;98(41):17470. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/MD.0000000000017470
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
