JBRA Assist. Reprod. 2021;25(1):109-114
ORIGINAL ARTICLE
doi: 10.5935/1518-0557.20200060
1IBRRA - Brazilian Institute of Assisted Reproduction, Belo Horizonte, Brazil
2School of Medicine, Tecnologico de Monterrey and Center for Reproductive Medicine CREASIS, San Pedro Monterrey, Mexico
3Professeur des Universites - Praticien Hospitalier en Medecine de la Reproduction, France; Hopital Foch, France
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest.
Acknowledgement section
The authors wish to thank the Brazilian Institute of Assisted Reproduction for
financially supporting our study.
ABSTRACT
Objective: The aim of the present prospective study was to evaluate which ovarian
reserve marker would be more reliable as the quality of the A + B embryos
(day 3 and blastocyst).
Methods: We ran a prospective study with 124 infertile women, aged 24-48 years, from
2017 to 2018. The patients were divided into 3 groups according to age and
the subgroups were compared for AMH, AFC, number of A+B embryos. New
division of the 3 groups was performed based on the AMH, and the subgroups
were compared for age, AFC and number of A+B embryos. Finally, we divided
the patients into 3 groups, based on the AFC, and we compared the subgroups
for age, AMH and number of A+B embryos. P<0.05 was
considered statistically significant.
Results: When the 124 patients were divided according to age, we found a significant
fall in an A+B embryo quality (day3; blastocyst) after 35 years
(p<0.038; p<0.035), and more
severely after 37 years (p<0.032; p<0.027). When the 124 patients were divided according
to AMH, there was a significant fall in A+B embryo quality (day 3;
blastocyst), with AMH<1ng/ml (p<0.023; p<0.021). When the 124 patients were divided
according to AFC, there was a significant fall in A+B embryo quality (day 3;
blastocyst) with AFC<7 (p<0.025; p<0.023). These markers had significant associations
with embryo quality (p<0.005).
Conclusion: Age, AFC and AMH have significant associations with A +B embryo quality on
day 3 and blastocyst.
Keywords: AMH, age, antral follicle count, ovarian reserve, embryo quality
INTRODUCTION
Fertility rates start to decrease in women older than 35 years of age, due to a
decrease in the number of normal oocytes available. This process is a consequence of
oocyte atresia and, although this normally happens to happen to all women, there is
no certainty in predicting the rate of decay. This decay is age-related, where there
is a decrease in ovarian quality, number of oocytes and markers of ovarian activity
through a gradual increase in circulating FSH, and a decrease in circulating
anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH), and antral follicle count (AFC).
The effects of female age on fertility was found in a classic report, where the
percentage of women who did not use contraceptives remained childless, steadily
after increasing according to their marriage age: 6% in the 20 to 24 age group; 9%
in the 25 to 29 age group; 15% in 30-34 years old; 30% in 35-39 years old and 64% in
40-44 year-olds (Vigier et al.,
1984).
Success rates in assisted reproductive technologies in 2001 show that the percentages
of clinical pregnancies (ultrasound-visible gestational sac) that did not result in
a live birth were 14% for women under 35 years of age; 19% for those 35 to 37 years
of age; 25% for those 38 to 40 years old and 40% for those over 40 years old (CDC, 2003).
Age-related decay in female fertility and increased risk of miscarriage are largely
attributed to oocyte abnormalities. The meiotic spindle in the oocytes of elderly
women regularly exhibits abnormalities in chromosomal alignment and microtubular
matrix composition (di Clemente et
al., 1992). Higher rates of single chromatid abnormalities
in oocytes (Weenen et al.,
2004), aneuploidy in preimplantation embryos (Durlinger et al., 2002) and ongoing
pregnancies may be found in older women. The rate of aneuploidy is a major cause of
increased miscarriage and decreased live birth rates in women of advanced
reproductive age.
Ovarian reserve assessment has recently been the focus of many clinical studies
(Guibourdenche et al.,
2003; Rajpert-De Meyts et
al., 1999; La Marca et al., 2005; de Vet et al., 2002; Fanchin et al., 2003). Thus, anti-Müllerian hormone
(AMH), also called Müller inhibitory substance, is a dimeric glycoprotein that
belongs to the transforming growth factor-b (TGF-b) superfamily, such as activins
and inhibins, being produced exclusively in the gonads. In females, AMH is
synthesized by granular cells (GC) around the preantral and small antral follicles
(Weenen et al., 2004; Durlinger et al., 2002).
AMH is almost undetectable in serum at birth, and it can reach higher levels after
puberty (Guibourdenche et al.,
2003; Rajpert-De Meyts et
al., 1999), although it then decreases with advancing age,
where it becomes again undetectable at menopause (La
Marca et al., 2005). Although the physiological roles
and mechanisms involved in AMH regulation are not yet precisely determined, recent
studies have pointed to this hormone as a viable marker for examining ovarian
activity.
Basal AMH, which can be determined prior to stimulation (usually on day 3 of the
cycle), was considered a better marker for assessing decreased ovarian reserve when
compared with the classic parameters: increased follicle stimulating hormone (FSH),
decreased inhibin B, or antral follicle count (de Vet et al., 2002; Fanchin et al., 2003; 2005; Muttukrishna et
al., 2005; Tremellen et al., 2005; Hazout, 2006). In addition, AMH is inversely correlatedwith age
andbaseline FSH values; and it is directly correlated with AFC (Piltonen et al., 2005).
According to assisted reproduction technology (ART), AMH serum, AFC, and age also
prove to be the most reliable hormonal marker of ovarian response to
gonadotropin-controlled ovarian hyperstimulation (COH), rather than baseline FSH,
estradiol, and inhibin B levels (Anckaert et
al., 2012; Hazout et
al., 2004; Muttukrishna et al., 2004; Nardo et al., 2009; Peñarrubia et al., 2005; Seifer et al., 2002). However, AMH, AFC and
age are not a good predictor of embryo quality or pregnancy in controlled ovarian
stimulation cycles. Thus, these markers are suggested to be only quantitative and
not qualitative for the ovarian reserve (Broer et al., 2011; Nelson et al., 2007; Smeenk et al., 2007). Age can, nevertheless, be a good
predictor of embryo quality (Scheffer et
al., 2017).
Currently, we check IVF cycle success by embryo quality, where embryonic development
is assessed by parameters associated with their morphological appearance, or
markers, which can thus determine embryo health and quality (Puissant et al., 1987; Gardner et al., 2000).
The goal of the present prospective study was to evaluate which ovarian reserve
marker would be most reliable regarding the quality of A + B day 3 embryos and
blastocyst; and demonstrate whether age, AFC and AMH are markers of quality and not
just oocyte quantity.
MATERIAL AND METHODS
Subjects
We ran a prospective study involving 124 infertile women, aged 24-48 years,
undergoing routine exploration during an unstimulated cycle that preceded ART at
our center, from May 2017 to October 2018. All patients met the following
inclusion criteria: i) both ovaries present, ii) no current or past diseases
affecting ovaries, gonadotropin or sex steroid secretion, clearance, or
excretion, iii) no current hormone therapy, iv) adequate visualization of
ovaries at transvaginal ultrasound scans, and v) total number of small antral
follicles (3-12 mm in diameter) between 1 and 32 follicles, including both
ovaries, and vi) no male infertility. All patients signed an informed consent
form for this analysis.
Protocol
We gave the patients leuprolide acetate (Lupron, Abbott, France), and started the
GnRH-agonist at a dose of 2,0 mg per day during the midluteal phase, with
approximately a 5-day overlap with the contraceptive (Diane 35, Schering,
Brasil). We monitored their pituitary down-regulation, and patients with
adequate pituitary desensitization started their recombinant FSH regime
(Gonal-F; Merck-Serono Pharmaceuticals, Italy), and reduced the GnRH-agonist
dose to 1,0 mg per day. We started the FSH with dosages between 150 and 300 IU
daily for 4 days, with or without human menopausal gonadotropin (HMG) (Menopur;
Ferring Pharmaceuticals, Germany). Thereafter, we adjusted the FSH dose
individually, according to the estradiol (E2) response and vaginal ultrasound
findings.
When two follicles reached ≥16 to 18 mm, 250 mg, we administered
recombinant human Chorionic Gonadotropin (Ovidrel, Merck-Serono Pharmaceuticals,
Italy) and retrieved oocytes 35 to 36 hours later.
We routinely performed intracytoplasmic sperm Injection (ICSI) in all the
fertilization procedures. Fertilization was evident when we spotted two
pronuclei. The embryos were cultured until the day of transfer (blastocyst) in
IVF Global® media (Life Global, Canada), supplemented with 10 % synthetic
serum substitute (SSS), and we graded the embryos on day 3 using the Veeck’s (Veeck, 1999) criteria, and the
blastocyst by Gardner’s grading scale (Gardner et al., 2000).
The same embryologist performed all embryology and embryo scoring in this study.
We classified the embryos on day 3 and blastocyst (day 5).
Hormonal Measurements and Ultrasound Scans
On day 3 of the cycle, preceding COH, we submitted the women to blood sampling by
venipuncture for serum AMH, and FSH measurement, and a transvaginal ovarian
ultrasound scan for follicle measurement.
We determined AMH and FSH serum levels using an automated multianalysis system,
with chemiluminescence detection (ACS-180; Bayer Diagnostics, Puteaux, France).
Serum AMH levels were determined using a second generation enzyme-linked
immunosorbent assay. Intra- and inter- assay variation coefficients (VC) were
< 6 and <10% respectively, with lower detection limits of 0.13 ng/ml and
linearity up to 21 ng/ml for AMH. The functional sensitivity for FSH was
0.1mIU/ml, and intra-assay and interassay CV were 3% and 5%, respectively.
Ultrasound scans were performed using a 3.7-9.3 MHz multifrequency transvaginal
probe (RIC5-9H; General Electric Medical Systems, Paris, France) by a single
operator who was blinded as to the results of the hormone assays. The ultrasound
examination aimed at evaluating the number and size of small antral follicles.
Follicles measuring 3-12 mm in mean diameter (mean of two orthogonal diameters)
in both ovaries were considered. To optimize the ovarian follicular assessment
reliability, the ultrasound scanner was equipped with a tissue harmonic imaging
system, which allowed improved image resolution and adequate recognition of
follicular borders. Intra-analysis CV for follicular and ovarian measurements
were <5%, and their lower limit of detection was 0.1 mm. In an effort to
evaluate the bulk of granulosa cells in both ovaries, we calculated the mean
follicle diameter (cumulative follicle diameter divided by the number of
follicles measuring 3-12 mm in diameter in both ovaries) and the largest
follicle diameter.
Groups and Subgroups
The patients were divided into 3 groups according to age; <35 years (62
patients), 35-37 years (31 patients) and >37 years (31 patients). After this
division, the groups were compared for AMH, AFC and number of A+B embryos (day 3
and blastocyst). Thereafter, we divided the 3 groups again, based on the AMH;
<1ng/ml (32 patients); 1-2 ng/ml (32 patients); >2 ng/ml (60 patients) and
we compared the groups for age, AFC and number of A+B embryos (day 3 and
blastocyst).
Finally the patients were again divided into 3 groups based on the AFC; >7 (30
patients); 8-14 (34 patients); > 14 (60 patients) and the groups were
compared for age, AMH, number of A+B embryos (day 3 and blastocyst). The
criteria used in the group divisions and subgroups regarding age, AMH and AFC
were based on the scientific literature (Bishop et al., 2017; Kim, 2017).
These divisions in groups based on the main ovarian reserve markers aimed at
evaluating which marker would be more reliable as the quality of the A + B
embryos (day 3 and blastocyst).
Statistical Analysis
Descriptive parameters and patient characteristics were reported as mean SD or
median (range), depending on the distribution. The Student’s t-test was
performed for continuous variables; Wilcoxon and Pearson’s Test were used where
appropriate for categorical variables. p< .05 was considered
statistically significant.
Ethical approval and consent to participate
Written informed consent was obtained from all participants before inclusion. The
study was approved by the IBRRA Ethical Committee. Our patients signed an
informed consent form for this analysis. Because the present study was merely
observational and included only data from routine measurements, it did not
require previous submission to our institutional review board.
RESULTS
Overall, at the time of this investigation, patients had a mean age of
34.28±4.02 years old; BMI of 24.92±3.14kg/m2; and length of
infertility of 3.44±2.44 years. On cycle day 3, the serum AMH level was
2.69±2.52ng/ml and the serum FSH level was 12.68±9.26mUI/ml. At
baseline, women had 12.53±5.34 antral follicles. Tables 1, 2 and 3 demonstrate the characteristics of each
subgroup.

Table 1. Characteristics of Subgroups by Age (years)

Table 2. Characteristics of AMH subgroups (ng/ml)

Table 3. Characteristics of AFC subgroups (n)
When the 124 patients were divided according to age, there was a significant fall in
AMH and AFC among those older than 35 years (p<0.006; p<0.003), and it was more severe after 37 years of age
(p<0.003; p<0.002). And the fall in A+B
embryo quality (day 3; blastocyst, respectively) was significant after 35 years
(p<0.038; p<0.035) and even more severe
after 37 years (p<0.032; p<0.027).
When the 124 patients were divided according to AMH, there was a significantly
negative correlation with age (p<0.05), and this was more
intense with AMH <1 ng/ml (p< 0.001); as well as a
significantly positive relationship with AFC (p<0.05) and more
intense with AMH>2 ng/ml (p<0.001). And the fall in A+B
embryo quality (day 3; blastocyst, respectively) was significant with AMH<1 ng/ml
(p<0.023; p<0.021).
When the 124 patients were divided according to AFC, there was a significantly
negative correlation with age (p<0.05), and this was more
intense with AFC<7ng/ml (p<0.001); as well as a significantly
positive relationship with AMH (p<0.05), and even more intense
with AFC>14 (p<0.006). And the fall in A+B embryo quality
(day 3; blastocyst, respectively) was significant with AFC<7
(p<0.025; p<0.023).
Table 4 shows that markers, age, AFC and AMH
had significant associations with A+B embryo quality on day 3 and that the strength
of significance was higher with AMH (p=0.307; p<0.006) and AFC (p=0.310; p<0.005) than age (p= -0.137; p<0,023).

Table 4. Associations between age, AMH and AFC with
day 3 Embryo-Quality (Pearson's Test)
However, Table 5 shows that the strength of significance was equal between AMH (p=0.290; p<0.005), AFC (p=0.295; p<0.005), and age (p= -0.28; p<0.005) with blastocyst quality.

Table 5. Relationship between markers age, AMH and
AFC with Embryos Blastocyst Quality (Pearson's Test)
DISCUSSION
This study validated the association between clinical measures often used in ovarian
reserve and embryo quality on the third day and in the blastocyst stage. There was
an association between basal AMH, age and AFC with embryo quality. Thus, they may
contribute as a possible explanation to the results of some studies that show the
associations of markers with the probability of pregnancy, since embryo quality is
fundamental for clinical success. There are suggestions that these markers are
quantitative and qualitative vis-à-vis the ovarian reserve. Although ovarian reserve
markers demonstrate clinical importance in assisted reproduction treatments, they
may indicate not only clinical but embryo prognosis as well.
Our group demonstrated that female age is a predictive marker of the number of
oocytes collected, number of oocytes in MII and embryo quality (Scheffer et al., 2017). This
relationship between age and embryo quality is due to the oocyte quality that will
then influence embryo quality. Women transfer half of the chromosomal complement to
the embryo, although the maternal and paternal genomes are not symmetrical and equal
in their influence on the embryo. Oocytes unfortunately show a drop in quality with
age, due to genetic changes. The incidence of non-disjunction and early chromatid
separation correlated to maternal aging. Disturbance in sister chromatid cohesion
might be a causal mechanism predisposing to premature chromatid separation and
subsequently to nondisjunction in female meiosis. In addition, the asymmetry of
female meiosis division could favor a nonrandom meiotic segregation of chromosomes
and chromatids.
In some studies, there was an age-association with the expression of certain genes
and proteins involved in mitochondrial function. Mitochondria play a role in
cellular energy metabolism, homeostasis and cell death, and are directly involved in
oogenesis and folliculogenesis. With age, there is an increase in damage to
mitochondrial DNA. Mitochondrial mutations in follicular cells are observed in
oocytes of older women, causing a decrease in the quality of these oocytes (McReynolds et al., 2012).
Age correlates with embryo quality and also with AMH and AFC. This paper reports that
these two ovarian reserve markers may also be associated with embryo quality. We
assessed the correlation of these markers with embryo quality on day 3, where the
main genetic expression is maternal, while in the blastocyst stage it is more
embryonic, that is; it has both paternal and maternal performance. This assessment
is important because these markers reflect the most advanced embryonic development,
of which maternal and paternal gene expression is most significant. Although there
was no case of male infertility, it is practical to perform ICSI in all cases.
Oxidative stress may affect embryo quality (Agarwal et al., 2005), although even morphologically normal
embryos may have an abnormal number of chromosomes and low pregnancy rates. However,
the possibility that the main factor in the etiology of female infertility is
associated with age is that the decline in oocyte quality is associated with factors
such as chromosomal aneuploidy and mitochondrial dysfunction (Twisk et al., 2006; Cheng et al., 2009; Eichenlaub-Ritter et al., 2011). However, the
underlying mechanisms are still inconclusive.
The objective of the study was to assess embryo quality, so no pregnancy rate was
analyzed. This is yet to be evaluated by the authors. It is important to highlight
some limitations present in the study, such as the small sample size, which may
limit the ability to demonstrate the additional value of these markers with embryo
quality. In addition, there are many published embryo scoring systems (Desai et al., 2000; Steer et al., 1992; Hoover et al., 1995; Rienzi et al., 2002; Fisch et al., 2001). Despite
the systematic approach of such scoring systems to compare and contrast embryos,
embryo morphology and assigning of a grade is, by default and design, a subjective
process subject to interobserver and intraobserver variability - although in our
case all embryos were evaluated by the same embryologist.
Initially the pregnancy rate, ongoing pregnancy rate or live birth rates were not the
primary objective of this study. But the authors are finishing other studies that
will be added to these rates as a primary objective, thus bringing new knowledge
about these markers in the future. Despite possible biases, this study is important
in that it demonstrates that these markers can reflect both the quantity and quality
of the ovarian reserve, and encourage further studies on this topic. Moreover, due
to the limitations of physicians in their countries, especially in poor or
developing countries, in evaluating all three markers, this study also ensures that
the evaluation of at least one marker has already enabled physicians to have better
embryonic prognoses.
Embryo quality assessment can also be performed using invasive methods, such as
PGT-A, and non-invasive methods such as Time Lapse. However, both methodologies have
flaws due to their subjectivities, damage to the embryo and questionable results.
Because some centers are unable to use these methodologies, other evaluation methods
should also be analyzed according to the objective of this study.
Therefore, more studies can improve the accuracy and interpretation of current
ovarian reserve markers relating to embryonic quality and clinical pregnancy
rates.
CONCLUSION
In summary, we demonstrated that commonly used clinical markers of ovarian reserve
are reflective of the true ovarian reserve, and AMH, AFC and age are markers of
embryo quality; therefore, they are markers of ovarian reserve quantity and
quality.
REFERENCES
Agarwal A, Gupta S, Sharma R. Oxidative stress and its implications
in female infertility - a clinician's perspective. Reprod Biomed Online.
2005;11:641-50.
Medline Crossref
Anckaert E, Smitz J, Schiettecatte J, Klein B, Arce JC. The value of
anti-Mullerian hormone measurement in the long GnRH agonist protocol:
association with ovarian response and gonadotrophin-dose adjustments. Hum
Reprod. 2012;27:1829-39.
Medline Crossref
Bishop LA, Richter KS, Patounakis G, Andriani L, Moon Km Devine K.
Diminished ovarian reserve as measured by means of baseline follicle-stimulating
hormone and antral follicle count is not associated with pregnancy loss in
younger in vitro fertilization patients. Fertil Steril. 2017;108:980-7.
Medline Crossref
Broer SL, Dólleman M, Opmeer BC, Fauser BC, Mol BW, Broekmans FJ.
AMH and AFC as predictors of excessive response in controlled ovarian
hyperstimulation: a meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2011;17:46-54.
Medline Crossref
Cheng EY, Hunt PA, Naluai-Cecchini TA, Fligner CL, Fujimoto VY,
Pasternack TL, Schwartz JM, Steinauer JE, Woodruff TJ, Cherry SM, Hansen TA,
Vallente RU, Broman KW, Hassold TJ. Meiotic recombination in human oocytes. PLoS
Genet. 2009;5:e1000661.
Medline Crossref
de Vet A, Laven JS, de Jong FH, Themmen AP, Fauser BC. Antimüllerian
hormone serum levels: a putative marker for ovarian aging. Fertil Steril.
2002;77:357-62.
Medline Crossref
Desai NN, Goldstein J, Rowland DY, Goldfarb JM. Morphological
evaluation of human embryos and derivation of an embryo quality scoring system
specific for day 3 embryos: a preliminary study. Hum Reprod. 2000;15:2190-6.
Medline Crossref
di Clemente N, Ghaffari S, Pepinsky RB, Pieau C, Josso N, Cate RL,
Vigier B. A quantitative and interspecific test for biological activity of
anti-müllerian hormone: the fetal ovary aromatase assay. Development.
1992;114:721-7.
Medline
Durlinger AL, Gruijters MJ, Kramer P, Karels B, Ingraham HA,
Nachtigal MW, Uilenbroek JT, Grootegoed JA, Themmen AP. Anti-Müllerian hormone
inhibits initiation of primordial follicle growth in the mouse ovary.
Endocrinology. 2002;143:1076-84.
Medline Crossref
Eichenlaub-Ritter U, Wieczorek M, Luke S, Seidel T. Age related
changes in mitochondrial function and new approaches to study redox regulation
in mammalian oocytes in response to age or maturation conditions. Mitochondrion.
2011;11:783-96.
Medline Crossref
Fanchin R, Schonäuer LM, Righini C, Guibourdenche J, Frydman R,
Taieb J. Serum anti-Müllerian hormone is more strongly related to ovarian
follicular status than serum inhibin B, estradiol, FSH and LH on day 3. Hum
Reprod. 2003;18:323-7.
Medline Crossref
Fanchin R, Taieb J, Lozano DH, Ducot B, Frydman R, Bouyer J. High
reproducibility of serum anti-Mullerian hormone measurements suggests a
multi-staged follicular secretion and strengthens its role in the assessment of
ovarian follicular status. Hum Reprod. 2005;20:923-7.
Medline Crossref
Fisch JD, Rodriguez H, Ross R, Overby G, Sher G. The Graduated
Embryo Score (GES) predicts blastocyst formation and pregnancy rate from
cleavage-stage embryos. Hum Reprod. 2001;16:1970-5.
Medline Crossref
Gardner DK, Lane M, Stevens J, Schlenker T, Schoolcraft WB.
Blastocyst score affects implantation and pregnancy outcome: towards a single
blastocyst transfer. Fertil Steril. 2000;73:1155-8.
Medline Crossref
Guibourdenche J, Lucidarme N, Chevenne D, Rigal O, Nicolas M, Luton
D, Léger J, Porquet D, Noël M. Anti-Müllerian hormone levels in serum from human
foetuses and children: pattern and clinical interest. Mol Cell Endocrinol.
2003;211:55-63.
Medline Crossref
Hazout A, Bouchard P, Seifer DB, Aussage P, Junca AM, Cohen-Bacrie
P. Serum antimullerian hormone/mullerian-inhibiting substance appears to be a
more discriminatory marker of assisted reproductive technology outcome than
follicle-stimulating hormone, inhibin B, or estradiol. Fertil Steril.
2004;82:1323-9.
Medline Crossref
Hazout A. Quality of ovarian reserve: inhibin B on day 3 of the
cycle or antimüllerian hormone (AMH)? Gynecol Obstet Fertil. 2006;34:1001-2.
Medline Crossref
Hoover L, Baker A, Check JH, Lurie D, O'Shaughnessy A. Evaluation of
a new embryo-grading system to predict pregnancy rates following in vitro
fertilization. Gynecol Obstet Invest. 1995;40:151-7.
Medline Crossref
Kim HH. Markers of ovarian reserve: is it possible to estimate an
ovarian age? Fertil Steril. 2017;108:950-1.
Medline Crossref
La Marca A, De Leo V, Giulini S, Orvieto R, Malmusi S, Giannella L,
Volpe A. Anti-Mullerian hormone in premenopausal women and after spontaneous or
surgically induced menopause. J Soc Gynecol Investig. 2005;12:545-8.
Medline Crossref
McReynolds S, Dzieciatkowska M, McCallie BR, Mitchell SD, Stevens J,
Hansen K, Schoolcraft WB, Katz-Jaffe MG. Impact of maternal aging on the
molecular signature of human cumulus cells. Fertil Steril. 2012;98:1574-80.e5.
Medline Crossref
Muttukrishna S, Suharjono H, McGarrigle H, Sathanandan M. Inhibin B
and anti-Mullerian hormone: markers of ovarian response in IVF/ICSI patients?
BJOG. 2004;111:1248-53.
Medline Crossref
Muttukrishna S, McGarrigle H, Wakim R, Khadum I, Ranieri DM, Serhal
P. Antral follicle count, anti-mullerian hormone and inhibin B: predictors of
ovarian response in assisted reproductive technology? BJOG. 2005;112:1384-90.
Medline Crossref
Nardo LG, Gelbaya TA, Wilkinson H, Roberts SA, Yates A, Pemberton P,
Laing I. Circulating basal anti-Müllerian hormone levels as predictor of ovarian
response in women undergoing ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization.
Fertil Steril. 2009;92:1586-93.
Medline Crossref
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. Hum Reprod.
2007;22:2414-21.
Medline Crossref
Peñarrubia J, Fábregues F, Manau D, Creus M, Casals G, Casamitjana
R, Carmona F, Vanrell JA, Balasch J. Basal and stimulation day 5 anti-Mullerian
hormone serum concentrations as predictors of ovarian response and pregnancy in
assisted reproductive technology cycles stimulated with gonadotropin-releasing
hormone agonist--gonadotropin treatment. Hum Reprod. 2005;20:915-22.
Medline Crossref
Piltonen T, Morin-Papunen L, Koivunen R, Perheentupa A, Ruokonen A,
Tapanainen JS. Serum anti-Müllerian hormone levels remain high until late
reproductive age and decrease during metformin therapy in women with polycystic
ovary syndrome. Hum Reprod. 2005;20:1820-6.
Medline Crossref
Puissant F, Van Rysselberge M, Barlow P, Deweze J, Leroy F. Embryo
scoring as a prognostic tool in IVF treatment. Hum Reprod. 1987;2:705-8.
Medline Crossref
Rajpert-De Meyts E, Jørgensen N, Graem N, Müller J, Cate RL,
Skakkebaek NE. Expression of anti-Müllerian hormone during normal and
pathological gonadal development: association with differentiation of Sertoli
and granulosa cells. J Clin Endocrinol Metab. 1999;84:3836-44.
Medline Crossref
Rienzi L, Ubaldi F, Iacobelli M, Ferrero S, Minasi MG, Martinez F,
Tesarik J, Greco E. Day 3 embryo transfer with combined evaluation at the
pronuclear and cleavage stages compares favourably with day 5 blastocyst
transfer. Hum Reprod. 2002;17:1852-5.
Medline Crossref
Scheffer JB, Scheffer BB, de Carvalho RF, Rodrigues J, Grynberg M,
Mendez Lozano DH. Age as a Predictor of Embryo Quality Regardless of the
Quantitative Ovarian Response. Int J Fertil Steril. 2017;11:40-6.
Medline Crossref
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. Fertil Steril.
2002;77:468-71.
Medline Crossref
Smeenk JM, Sweep FC, Zielhuis GA, Kremer JA, Thomas CM, Braat DD.
Antimüllerian hormone predicts ovarian responsiveness, but not embryo quality or
pregnancy, after in vitro fertilization or intracyoplasmic sperm injection.
Fertil Steril. 2007;87:223-6.
Medline Crossref
Steer CV, Mills CL, Tan SL, Campbell S, Edwards RG. The cumulative
embryo score: a predictive embryo scoring technique to select the optimal number
of embryos to transfer in an in-vitro fertilization and embryo transfer
programme. Hum Reprod. 1992;7:117-9.
Medline Crossref
Tremellen KP, Kolo M, Gilmore A, Lekamge DN. Anti-mullerian hormone
as a marker of ovarian reserve. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2005;45:20-4.
Medline Crossref
Twisk M, Mastenbroek S, van Wely M, Heineman MJ, Van der Veen F,
Repping S. Preimplantation genetic screening for abnormal number of chromosomes
(aneuploidies) in in vitro fertilisation or intracytoplasmic sperm injection.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006;25:CD005291.
Medline Crossref
Weenen C, Laven JS, Von Bergh AR, Cranfield M, Groome NP, Visser JA,
Kramer P, Fauser BC, Themmen AP. Anti-Müllerian hormone expression pattern in
the human ovary: potential implications for initial and cyclic follicle
recruitment. Mol Hum Reprod. 2004;10:77-83.
Medline Crossref
Veeck LL. Atlas of human gametes and conceptuses. New York: Parthenon Publishing; 1999.
Vigier B, Picard JY, Tran D, Legeai L, Josso N. Production of
anti-Müllerian hormone: another homology between Sertoli and granulosa cells.
Endocrinology. 1984;114:1315-20.
Medline Crossref