A A Ersahin1, H Arpaci, S S Ersahin, N Celik, M Acet. 1. Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Bahcesehir University School of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey. aynur.ersahin@hotmail.com.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical value of antral follicle count (AFC) and anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) for the prediction of ovarian response in women with endometrioma undergoing controlled ovarian stimulation for IVF using GnRH antagonist treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty patients with endometrioma who underwent their first IVF/ICSI cycle with GnRH antagonist treatment were included in the study. The average AMH values were recorded as 1.5-2 ng/mL. Fifty infertile women are not suffering from endometrioma were selected from those with male factor infertility as control. They were matched according to both serum AMH levels and age. Serum samples have been collected before the IVF treatment for determining AMH levels in both groups of subjects. Likewise, each group of subject underwent ultrasound scan for AFC on day 3. Total number of oocytes retrieved during OPU, the number of transferred embryo, implantation and clinical pregnancy rates, live birth and abortion rates, total dose of rhFSH were noted in both groups of subjects. RESULTS: Day 3 AFC was significantly higher in the control group compared to women with endometrioma. Both the number of retrieved oocytes during oocyte pick-up, MII oocytes and 2 PN embryo were significantly lower in the endometrioma. Likewise, the fertilization, implantation, clinical pregnancy and live birth rates of endometrioma group were significantly lower than those in the control group. The total rFSH dose was higher in the endometrioma group than those in control. The percentage of abortion in the endometrioma group was found to higher compared to those with controls. CONCLUSIONS: AFC is more sensitive than the AMH in detecting ovarian response in women with ovarian endometrioma. The individualization of GnRH antagonist protocols in subjects having endometrioma might be improved by using an AFC-tailored approach instead of AMH.
OBJECTIVE: To assess the clinical value of antral follicle count (AFC) and anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) for the prediction of ovarian response in women with endometrioma undergoing controlled ovarian stimulation for IVF using GnRH antagonist treatment. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Fifty patients with endometrioma who underwent their first IVF/ICSI cycle with GnRH antagonist treatment were included in the study. The average AMH values were recorded as 1.5-2 ng/mL. Fifty infertile women are not suffering from endometrioma were selected from those with male factor infertility as control. They were matched according to both serum AMH levels and age. Serum samples have been collected before the IVF treatment for determining AMH levels in both groups of subjects. Likewise, each group of subject underwent ultrasound scan for AFC on day 3. Total number of oocytes retrieved during OPU, the number of transferred embryo, implantation and clinical pregnancy rates, live birth and abortion rates, total dose of rhFSH were noted in both groups of subjects. RESULTS: Day 3 AFC was significantly higher in the control group compared to women with endometrioma. Both the number of retrieved oocytes during oocyte pick-up, MII oocytes and 2 PN embryo were significantly lower in the endometrioma. Likewise, the fertilization, implantation, clinical pregnancy and live birth rates of endometrioma group were significantly lower than those in the control group. The total rFSH dose was higher in the endometrioma group than those in control. The percentage of abortion in the endometrioma group was found to higher compared to those with controls. CONCLUSIONS: AFC is more sensitive than the AMH in detecting ovarian response in women with ovarian endometrioma. The individualization of GnRH antagonist protocols in subjects having endometrioma might be improved by using an AFC-tailored approach instead of AMH.
Authors: M E Madeleine van der Perk; Linda Broer; Yutaka Yasui; Leslie L Robison; Melissa M Hudson; Joop S E Laven; Helena J van der Pal; Wim J E Tissing; Birgitta Versluys; Dorine Bresters; Gertjan J L Kaspers; Andrica C H de Vries; Cornelis B Lambalk; Annelies Overbeek; Jacqueline J Loonen; Catharina C M Beerendonk; Julianne Byrne; Claire Berger; Eva Clemens; Uta Dirksen; Jeanette Falck Winther; Sophie D Fosså; Desiree Grabow; Monica Muraca; Melanie Kaiser; Tomáš Kepák; Jarmila Kruseova; Dalit Modan-Moses; Claudia Spix; Oliver Zolk; Peter Kaatsch; Jesse H Krijthe; Leontien C M Kremer; Russell J Brooke; Jessica L Baedke; Ron H N van Schaik; John N van den Anker; André G Uitterlinden; Annelies M E Bos; Flora E van Leeuwen; Eline van Dulmen-den Broeder; Anne-Lotte L F van der Kooi; Marry M van den Heuvel-Eibrink Journal: Cancers (Basel) Date: 2021-09-13 Impact factor: 6.639