Title: Anti Mullerian Hormone Levels and Antral Follicle Count as Predictors of In Vitro Fertilisation Outcomes
Authors: Dr Basavanapalli Menaka, Dr Vasundhara Kamineni, Dr Akkenapally Prasanna Latha, Dr Nandini Joshi, Dr Vamsha Shree
DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.18535/jmscr/v4i11.53
Abstract
Objective: To study the role of Anti Mullerian hormone levels and antral follicle count in predicting the outcomes in IVF cycles.
Methods: A prospective study was done in fifty women with infertility undergoing IVF treatment. On Day3, serum levels of E2, FSH, AMH were measured and TVS for AFC was done. Ovarian stimulation was started using HMG from day2 of menstrual cycle. Follicular growth monitored. All patients were categorized into 4 fertility groups based on their AMH and AFC values as optimal, satisfactory, low and very low fertility potential groups. IVF/ICSI outcomes were measured in each category and tabulated.
Results: In our study 29(58%) pregnancies were obtained out of 50 women. There was no significant difference in terms of mean age, duration of infertility and BMI b/w pregnant and non pregnant women (p value-0.194,0.367,0.475). Statistical significance was seen in AMH levels, AFC, between pregnant and non pregnant women (p value- 0.003, 0.0001). There is positive correlation between AMH levels & AFC, serum AMH, AFC and pregnancy status. Mean serum AMH in pregnant group is 5.1024, and in non pregnant group it is 2.2738. Mean AFC in pregnant group is double that of non pregnant group i.e. 7.31 and 3.48, which suggests that both are good predictors of pregnancy outcome in IVF cycles.
Conclusions: Serum AMH levels and AFC are good predictors of pregnancy outcomes in IVF/ICSI cycles. Clinical pregnancy outcome is maximum in low and satisfactory fertility potential groups i.e .,with serum AMH 2.2 to 6.7 and AFC between 3 to 10.
References
1. Majumder K, Gelbaya TA, Laing I, Nardo LG. The use of anti-Müllerian hormone and antral follicle count to predict the potential of oocytes and embryos. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2010;150 (2):166–70.
2. Nelson SM, Yates RW, Lyall H, Jamieson M, Traynor I, Gaudoin M, et al. Antim-ullerian Hormone based approach to controlled ovarian stimulation for assisted conception. Hum Reprod. 2009;24:867-75.
3. Gnoth C, Schuring AN, Friol K, Tigges J, Mallmann P, Godehardt E. Relevance of anti-Mullerian hormone measurement in a routine IVF program. Hum Reprod. 2008; 23: 1359-65.
4. Broer SL, Mol BW, Hendriks D, Broekmans FJ. The role of Antimullerian hormone in prediction of outcome after IVF : Comparison with the antral follicle count. Fertil Steril. 2009; 91: 705-14.
5. Aflatoonian A, Oskouian H, Ahmadi S, Oskouian L. Prediction of high ovarian response to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation : Antimullerian hormone versus small antral follicle count (2-6mm) J Assist Reprod Genet. 2009; 26: 319-25.
6. Freour T, Mirallie S, Colombel A, Bach-Ngohou K, Masson D, Barriere P. Anti-mullerian hormone: Clinical relevance in assisted reproductive therapy. Ann Endocrinol. 2006; 67: 567-74.
7. Smeenk JM, Sweep FC, Zielhuis GA, Kremer JA, Thomas CM, Braat DD. Antimullerian hormone predicts ovarian responsiveness, but not embryo quality or pregnancy, after in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Fertil Steril 2007; 87: 223-226.
8. La Marca A, Stabile G, Artenisio AC, Volpe A. Serum anti-Mullerian hormone throughout the human menstrual cycle. Hum Reprod 2006; 21 (12): 3103-3107.
9. Visser J. Role of anti-Mullerian hormone in follicle recruitment and maturation. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 2006; 35(5Pt2): 2S30-2S34.
10. Feyereisen E, Mendez Lozano DH, Taieb J, Hesters L, Frydman R, Fanchin R. Anti-Mullerian hormone: clinical insights into a promising biomarker of ovarian follicular status. Reprod Biomed Online 2006; 12(6): 695-703.
11. Hazout A, Bouchard P, Seifer DB, Aussage P, Junca AM, Cohen-Bacrie P. (2004) Serum antimüllerian hormone/ müllerianinhibiting substance appears to be a more discriminatory marker of assisted reproductive technology outcome than follicle-stimulating hormone, inhibin B, or estradiol. Fertil Steril.;82(5):1323–9.
12. Eldar-Geva T, Ben-Chetrit A, Spitz IM, Rabinowitz R, Markowitz E, Mimoni T, Gal M, Zylber-Haran E, Margalioth EJ. (2005) Dynamic assays of inhibin B, anti-Mullerian hormone and estradiol following FSH stimulation and ovarian ultrasonography as predictors of IVF outcome. Hum Reprod.;20(11):3178–83.
13. Wu CH, Chen YC, Wu HH, Yang JG, Chang YJ, Tsai HD. (2009) Serum anti-Müllerian hormone predicts ovarian response and cycle outcome in IVF patients. J Assist Reprod Genet.; 26(7): 383–9.
14. Broer SL, Mol BW, Hendriks D, Broekmans FJ. (2009) The role of antimullerian hormone in prediction of outcome after IVF: comparison with the antral follicle count. Fertil Steril.;91(3): 705–14.
15. Sahmay S, Cetin M, Ocal P, Kaleli S, Senol H, Birol F, Irez T. Serum anti-Müllerian hormone level as a predictor of poor ovarian response in IVF patients. Reprod Med Biol. 2011; 10:9–14.
16. Ocal P, Sahmay S, Cetin M, Irez T, Guralp O, Cepni I. Serum anti-Müllerian hormone and antral follicle count as predictive markers of OHSS in ART cycles. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2011;28 (12):1197–203.
17. Ibrahim AA, Maha MB, Hanan HM. Anti-Mullerian and antral follicle count as predictors of ovarian reserve and successful IVF. Asian Pacific J of Reprod 2012; 1(2): 89-92.
18. Wang JG, Douglas NC, Nakhuda GS, Choi JM, Park SJ, Thornton MH, Guarnaccia MM, Sauer MV. The association between anti- Müllerian hormone and IVF pregnancy outcomes is influenced by age. Reprod Biomed Online. 2010 Dec;21(6):757–61.
19. Kini S, Li HW, Morrell D, Pickering S, Thong KJ. Anti-mullerian hormone and cumulative pregnancy outcome in in-vitro fertilization. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2010; 27: 449-56.