Top

Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics

Published in:

01-09-2013 | Reproductive Medicine

Prospective analysis of ovarian reserve markers as determinant in response to controlled ovarian stimulation in women undergoing IVF cycles in low resource setting in India

Authors: Neeta Singh, Anupama Bahadur, Neena Malhotra, Mani Kalaivani, Suneeta Mittal

Published in: Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics | Issue 3/2013

Abstract

Introduction

The objective of this study was to determine whether ovarian reserve markers can predict ovarian response in women undergoing their first cycle of assisted reproduction.

Materials and methods

This prospective observational study included 292 infertile patients undergoing their first IVF trial in the Assisted Reproductive Unit in a tertiary care hospital. Day 2 follicle stimulating hormone (FSH), Inhibin B, anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH), antral follicle count (AFC) and ovarian volume was measured before commencement of controlled ovarian hyperstimulation. The main outcome measures were oocytes retrieved and this was correlated with ovarian reserve markers.

Results

The mean age was 31.8 (±4.4) years and mean duration of infertility 8.2 (±3.9) years. The correlation between oocytes retrieved and age, day 2 FSH, Inhibin B, AMH, AFC and volume of the ovary was calculated. A negative correlation was found with age (r = −0.22, p < 0.001) and day 2 FSH (r = −0.35, p < 0.001). A positive correlation was seen with AMH (r = 0.15, p = 0.022), AFC (r = 0.48, p < 0.05) and volume (r = 0.17, p = 0.009). In the bivariate analysis, 1 year increase in age was found to decrease the oocytes retrieved count by 0.37 with a significant p value. The independent significant factors found in multiple linear regression analysis were day 2 FSH and AFC.

Discussion

The present study concludes that day 2 FSH and AFC are promising biomarkers for ovarian reserve in predicting ovarian response to gonadotropin stimulation in IVF patients.

Astolfi P, Ulizzi L, Zonta LA (1999) Selective cost of delayed childbearing. Hum Reprod 14:572–573PubMedCrossRef

Johnson NP, Bagrie EM, Coomarasamy A, Bhattacharya S, Shelling AN, Jessop S, Farquhar C, Khan KS (2006) Ovarian reserve tests for predicting fertility outcomes for assisted reproductive technology: the international systematic collaboration of ovarian reserve evaluation protocol for a systematic review of ovarian reserve test accuracy. BJOG 113:1472–1480PubMedCrossRef

Coccia ME, Rizzello F (2008) Ovarian reserve. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1127:27–30 (Review)PubMedCrossRef

Arslan M, Bocca S, Mirkin S, Barroso G, Stadtmauer L, Oehninger S (2005) Controlled ovarian hyperstimulation protocols for in vitro fertilization: two decades of experience after the birth of Elizabeth Carr. Fertil Steril 84:555–569PubMedCrossRef

Akande VA, Fleming CF, Hunt LP, Keay SD, Jenkins JM (2002) Biological versus chronological ageing of oocytes, distinguishable by raised FSH levels in relation to the success of IVF treatment. Hum Reprod 17:2003–2008PubMedCrossRef

Sauer MV (1998) The impact of age on reproductive potential: lessons learned from oocyte donation. Maturitas 30:221–225PubMedCrossRef

Nikolaou D, Templeton A (2003) Early ovarian ageing: a hypothesis. Detection and clinical relevance. Hum Reprod 18:1137–1139PubMedCrossRef

Lambalk CB, van Disseldorp J, de Koning CH, Broekmans FJ (2009) Testing ovarian reserve to predict age at menopause. Maturitas 63:280–291PubMedCrossRef

Ferraretti AP, La Marca A, Fauser BC, Tarlatzis B, Nargund G, Gianaroli L (2011) ESHRE working group on poor ovarian response definition. ESHRE consensus on the definition of ‘poor response’ to ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: the Bologna criteria. Hum Reprod 26(7):1616–1624PubMedCrossRef

10.

Keay SD, Liversedge NH, Mathur RS, Jenkins JM (1997) Assisted conception following poor ovarian response to gonadotrophin stimulation. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 104:521–527PubMedCrossRef

11.

Mcllveen M, Skull JD, Ledger WL (2007) Evaluation of the utility of multiple endocrine and ultrasound measures of ovarian reserve in the prediction of cycle cancellation in a high-risk IVF population. Hum Reprod 22:778–785CrossRef

12.

Nelson SM, Yates RW, Lyall H, Jamieson M, Traynor I, Gaudoin M, Mitchell P, Ambrose P, Fleming R (2009) Anti-Mullerian hormone-based approach to controlled ovarian stimulation for assisted conception. Hum Reprod 24:867–875PubMedCrossRef

13.

Mathur R, Kailasam C, Jenkins J (2007) Review of the evidence base of strategies to prevent ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. Hum Fertil 10:75–85CrossRef

14.

Faddy MJ, Gosden RG (1995) A mathematical model of follicle dynamics in the human ovary. Hum Reprod 10:770–775PubMed

15.

Muttukrishna S, McGarrigle H, Wakim R, Khadum I, Ranieri DM, Serhal P (2005) Antral follicle count, anti-Mullerian hormone and inhibin B: predictors of ovarian response in assisted reproductive technology? BJOG 112:1384–1390PubMedCrossRef

16.

Lorusso F, Vicino M, Lamanna G, Trerotoli P, Serio G, Depalo R (2007) Performance of different ovarian reserve markers for predicting the number of oocytes retrieved and mature oocytes. Maturitas 56(4):429–435PubMedCrossRef

17.

Broekmans FJ, Kwee J, Hendriks DJ, Mol BW, Lambalk CB (2006) A systematic review of tests predicting ovarian reserve and IVF outcome. Hum Reprod Update 12:685–718PubMedCrossRef

18.

Fanchin R, Schonauer LM, Righini C, Frydman N, Frydman R, Taieb J (2003) Serum anti-Mullerian hormone dynamics during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation. Hum Reprod 18:328–332PubMedCrossRef

19.

Behringer RR, Finegold MJ, Cate RL (1994) Mullerian-inhibiting substance function during mammalian sexual development. Cell 79:415–425PubMedCrossRef

20.

Weenen C, Laven JS, Von Bergh AR, Cranfield M, Groome NP, Visser JA et al (2004) Anti-Mullerian hormone expression pattern in the human ovary: potential implications for initial and cyclic follicle recruitment. Mol Hum Reprod 10:77–83PubMedCrossRef

21.

Van Rooij IA, Broekmans FJ, Scheffer GJ, Looman CW, Habbema JD, de Jong FH et al (2005) Serum antimullerian hormone levels best reflect the reproductive decline with age in normal women with proven fertility: a longitudinal study. Fertil Steril 83:979–987PubMedCrossRef

22.

Van Rooij IA, Broekmans FJ, te Velde ER, Fauser BC, Bancsi LF, de Jong FH et al (2002) Serum anti Mullerian hormone levels: a novel measure of ovarian reserve. Hum Reprod 17:3065–3071PubMedCrossRef

23.

La Marca A, Stabile G, Artenisio AC, Volpe A (2006) Serum anti-Mullerian hormone throughout the human menstrual cycle. Hum Reprod 21:3103–3107PubMedCrossRef

24.

Jayaprakasan K, Campbell B, Hopkisson J, Johnson I, Raine-Fenning N (2010) A prospective, comparative analysis of anti-Mullerian hormone, inhibin-B, and three-dimensional ultrasound determinants of ovarian reserve in the prediction of poor response to controlled ovarian stimulation. Fertil Steril 93(3):855–864PubMedCrossRef

25.

La Marca A, Sighinolfi G, Radi D, Argento C, Baraldi E, Artenisio AC, Stabile G, Volpe A (2010) Anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) as a predictive marker in assisted reproductive technology (ART). Hum Reprod Update 16(2):113–130PubMedCrossRef

26.

Anckaert E, Smitz J, Schiettecatte J, Klein BM, Arce J-C (2012) The value of anti-Mullerian hormone measurement in the long GnRH agonist protocol: association with ovarian response and gonadotrophin-dose adjustments. Hum Reprod 27:1829–1839PubMedCrossRef

27.

Yates AP, Rustamov O, Roberts SA, Lim HY, Pemberton PW, Smith A, Nardo LG (2011) Anti-Mullerian hormone-tailored stimulation protocols improve outcomes whilst reducing adverse effects and costs of IVF. Hum Reprod 26(9):2353–2362PubMedCrossRef

28.

Hendriks DJ, Kwee J, Mol BW, te Velde ER, Broekmans FJ (2007) Ultrasonography as a tool for the prediction of outcome in IVF patients: a comparative meta-analysis of ovarian volume and antral follicle count. Fertil Steril 87:764–775PubMedCrossRef

Title: Prospective analysis of ovarian reserve markers as determinant in response to controlled ovarian stimulation in women undergoing IVF cycles in low resource setting in India
Authors: Neeta Singh
Anupama Bahadur
Neena Malhotra
Mani Kalaivani
Suneeta Mittal
Publication date: 01-09-2013
Publisher: Springer Berlin Heidelberg
Published in: Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics / Issue 3/2013
Print ISSN: 0932-0067
Electronic ISSN: 1432-0711
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-013-2802-3

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Prospective analysis of ovarian reserve markers as determinant in response to controlled ovarian stimulation in women undergoing IVF cycles in low resource setting in India

Abstract

Introduction

Materials and methods

Results

Discussion

Keynote webinar | Spotlight on medication adherence

Springer Medicine

Abstract

Introduction

Materials and methods

Results

Discussion

Please log in to get access to this content

Other articles of this Issue 3/2013

T-cadherin expression in uterine leiomyoma

The success rate of pregnancy in IUI cycles following endometrial sampling. A randomized controlled study

HE4 and its evolving role in assessing tumor prognosis in gynecological and systemic malignancies

Learning curve for laparoscopic staging of early and locally advanced cervical and endometrial cancer

Conservative management of cervical ectopic pregnancy: systemic methotrexate followed by curettage

Heterotopic quadruplet pregnancy and successful twin outcome