OBJECTIVE: To assess the predictive performance and clinical value of basal FSH as a test for ovarian reserve in in vitro fertilization (IVF) patients. DESIGN: Meta-analysis. SETTING: Tertiary fertility center. PATIENT(S): Patients undergoing IVF. INTERVENTION(S): None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Poor ovarian response, nonpregnancy. RESULT(S): We located 21 studies that had reported on basal FSH and IVF outcome. No single study met high standards of methodological rigor; most studies are of moderate methodological quality only. The summary receiver operating characteristic curve indicated a moderate predictive performance for poor response, and a low predictive performance for nonpregnancy. Predictions with a substantial shift from pre-FSH-test probability to post-FSH test probability are only achieved at extreme cut-off levels for basal FSH. Sensitivity of such cut-off levels, for both the prediction of poor response and nonpregnancy, is limited. CONCLUSION(S): Clinical value of testing for basal FSH is restricted to a small minority of patients. Basal FSH should not be regarded as a useful routine test for the prediction of IVF outcome. The development of better tests to assess ovarian reserve remains of importance.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the predictive performance and clinical value of basal FSH as a test for ovarian reserve in in vitro fertilization (IVF) patients. DESIGN: Meta-analysis. SETTING: Tertiary fertility center. PATIENT(S): Patients undergoing IVF. INTERVENTION(S): None. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE(S): Poor ovarian response, nonpregnancy. RESULT(S): We located 21 studies that had reported on basal FSH and IVF outcome. No single study met high standards of methodological rigor; most studies are of moderate methodological quality only. The summary receiver operating characteristic curve indicated a moderate predictive performance for poor response, and a low predictive performance for nonpregnancy. Predictions with a substantial shift from pre-FSH-test probability to post-FSH test probability are only achieved at extreme cut-off levels for basal FSH. Sensitivity of such cut-off levels, for both the prediction of poor response and nonpregnancy, is limited. CONCLUSION(S): Clinical value of testing for basal FSH is restricted to a small minority of patients. Basal FSH should not be regarded as a useful routine test for the prediction of IVF outcome. The development of better tests to assess ovarian reserve remains of importance.
Authors: D J Hendriks; F J Broekmans; L F J M M Bancsi; C W N Looman; F H de Jong; E R te Velde Journal: J Assist Reprod Genet Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 3.412
Authors: Kate Devine; Sunni L Mumford; Mae Wu; Alan H DeCherney; Micah J Hill; Anthony Propst Journal: Fertil Steril Date: 2015-06-11 Impact factor: 7.329
Authors: Kimiko A Broeze; Brent C Opmeer; Lucas M Bachmann; Frank J Broekmans; Patrick M M Bossuyt; Sjors F P J Coppus; Neil P Johnson; Khalid S Khan; Gerben ter Riet; Fulco van der Veen; Madelon van Wely; Ben W J Mol Journal: BMC Med Res Methodol Date: 2009-03-27 Impact factor: 4.615