Journal of Reproduction & Infertility

Journal of Reproduction & Infertility

Association Between AMH Levels and Fertility/Reproductive Outcomes Among Women Undergoing IVF: A Retrospective Study

Authors
Asha Vijay 1
Murali Mohan Reddy Gopireddy 2
Syed Fyzullah 3
Gollapalli Priyanka 2
Maheswari M 4
Usha Rani 3
Swathi Rajesh 3
1 Scientific Director and Dean, GarbhaGudi Institute of Reproductive Health and Research (GGIRHR), Hanumanthnagar, Bangalore, India
2 Evidence Generation, Evidencian Research Associates, Bangalore, India
3 Department of Embryology, GarbhaGudi Institute of Reproductive Health and Research (GGIRHR), Hanumanthnagar, Bangalore, India
4 Department of Reproductive Medicine, GarbhaGudi Institute of Reproductive Health and Research (GGIRHR), Hanumanthnagar, Bangalore, India
10.18502/jri.v23i1.8453
Abstract
Background: Anti-mullerian hormone (AMH) is a marker for predicting ovarian response to gonadotropin stimulation. It plays an important role in ovarian primordial follicle recruitment and dominant follicle selection. Therefore, the present study evaluated the AMH levels and their association with fertility/reproductive outcomes among women undergoing IVF. Methods: A retrospective study was conducted on 665 women in GarbhaGudi Institute of Reproductive Health and Research in India from October 2018 to 2019. Subjects were divided into ≥1.1 and ≤1.1 AMH level groups. Data on age, luteinizing hormone; LH (mIU/L), follicle-stimulating hormone values; FSH (mIU/ml), LH value, oocytes retrieved, and oocytes fertilization were collected. AMH category was considered as the primary explanatory variable. Independent sample t-test and chisquare tests were performed. The p<0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: Couple’s age, FSH values (mIU/ml), number of large follicles, matured oocytes, fertilized oocytes, and cleaved embryos were statistically significant (p<0.001) among subjects with ≥1.1 AMH values. Percentage of women with successful embryo transfer was slightly higher among AMH category 1.1 (p=0.09). Fertilization rate (86.67±20.08 vs. 83.64±21.39, p=0.18) and clinical pregnancy rate (43.38% vs. 36.36%, p=0.19) were slightly higher among women with AMH level of ≥1.1 as compared to AMH of <1.1. Live birth rate was slightly higher among women with AMH level of 1.1 (25.85% vs. 22.22%, p=0.45). Also, the number of fertilized oocytes was associated with clinical pregnancy rate (aOR=1.20, 95%CI 1.09-1.33). Conclusion: Women with ≥1.10 serum AMH levels had more number of retrieved oocytes, good oocyte quality, increased embryo transfer, and fertilization rates.
Keywords
anti
Mullerian Hormone
fertilization
Pregnancy rate
Chen C, Kattera S. Comparison of pronuclear zygote morphology and early cleavage status of zygotes as additional criteria in the selection of day 3 embryos: a randomized study. Fertil Steril. 2006;85(2):347-52.
La Marca A, Sighinolfi G, Radi D, Argento C, Baraldi E, Artenisio AC, et al. Anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) as a predictive marker in assisted reproductive technology (ART). Hum Reprod Update. 2010;16(2):113-30.
Josso N. Anti-mullerian hormone: hormone or growth factor? Prog Growth Factor Res. 1990;2(3):169-79.
Weenen C, Laven JS, Von Bergh AR, Cranfield M, Groome NP, Visser JA, et al. Anti-Mullerian hormone expression pattern in the human ovary: potential implications for initial and cyclic follicle recruitment. Mol Hum Reprod. 2004;10(2):77-83.
de Vet A, Laven JS, de Jong FH, Themmen AP, Fauser BC. Antimullerian hormone serum levels: a putative marker for ovarian aging. Fertil Steril. 2002;77(2):357-62.
Tremellen KP, Kolo M, Gilmore A, Lekamge DN. Anti‐müllerian hormone as a marker of ovarian reserve. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol. 2005;45(1):20-4.
Penarrubia J, Fábregues F, Manau D, Creus M, Casals G, Casamitjana R, et al. Basal and stimulation day 5 anti-Müllerian 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 Update. 2005;20(4):915-22.
Irez T, Ocal P, Guralp O, Cetin M, Aydogan B, Sahmay S. Different serum anti-Mullerian hormone concentrations are associated with oocyte quality, embryo development parameters and IVF-ICSI outcomes. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2011;284(5):1295-301.
Lekamge DN, Barry M, Kolo M, Lane M, Gilchrist RB, Tremellen KP. Anti-Müllerian hormone as a predictor of IVF outcome. Reprod Biomed Online. 2007;14(5):602-10.
Nardo LG, Gelbaya TA, Wilkinson H, Roberts SA, Yates A, Pemberton P, et al. Circulating basal anti-Müllerian hormone levels as predictor of ovarian response in women undergoing ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 2009;92(5):1586-93.
Ebner T, Sommergruber M, Moser M, Shebl O, Schreier-Lechner E, Tews G. Basal level of anti-Müllerian hormone is associated with oocyte quality in stimulated cycles. Hum Reprod. 2006;21(8):2022-6.
Sowers M, McConnell D, Gast K, Zheng H, Nan B, McCarthy JD, et al. Anti-Müllerian hormone and inhibin B variability during normal menstrual cycles. Fertil Steril. 2010;94(4):1482-6.
Revelli A, Biasoni V, Gennarelli G, Canosa S, Dalmasso P, Benedetto C. IVF results in patients with very low serum AMH are significantly affected by chronological age. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2016;33(5):603-9.
Van Rooij I, Broekmans F, Te Velde E, Fauser B, Bancsi L, De Jong F, et al. Serum anti-Müllerian hormone levels: a novel measure of ovarian reserve. Hum Reprod. 2002;17(12):3065-71.
Seifer DB, Baker VL, Leader B. Age-specific serum anti-Müllerian hormone values for 17,120 women presenting to fertility centers within the United States. Fertil Steril. 2011;95(2):747-50.
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.
Takahashi C, Fujito A, Kazuka M, Sugiyama R, Ito H, Isaka K. Anti-Müllerian hormone substance from follicular fluid is positively associated with success in oocyte fertilization during in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 2008;89(3):586-91.
Lundin K, Bergh C, Hardarson T. Early embryo cleavage is a strong indicator of embryo quality in human IVF. Hum Reprod. 2001;16(12):2652-7.
Hazout A, Bouchard P, Seifer DB, Aussage P, Junca AM, Cohen-Bacrie P. Serum antimüllerian hormone/müllerian-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(5):1323-9.
Cupisti S, Dittrich R, Mueller A, Strick R, Stiegler E, Binder H, et al. Correlations between anti-müllerian hormone, inhibin B, and activin A in follicular fluid in IVF/ICSI patients for assessing the maturation and developmental potential of oocytes. Eur J Med Res. 2007;12(12):604-8.
Van den Bergh MJ, Fahy-Deshe M, Hohl MK. Pronuclear zygote score following intracytoplasmic injection of hyaluronan-bound spermatozoa: a prospective randomized study. Reprod Biomed Online. 2009;19(6):796-801.
Honnma H, Baba T, Sasaki M, Hashiba Y, Oguri H, Fukunaga T, et al. Serum anti-Mullerian hormone levels affect the rate of ongoing pregnancy after in vitro fertilization. Reprod Sci. 2013;20(1):51-9.
Kissin DM, Schieve LA, Reynolds MA. Multiple-birth risk associated with IVF and extended embryo culture: USA, 2001. Hum Reprod. 2005;20(8):2215-23.
Tal R, Seifer DB, Khanimov M, Schwartz E, Grazi RV, Malter HE. Anti-Müllerian hormone as an independent predictor of twin versus singleton pregnancy in fresh cycles. Reprod Biomed Online. 2013;26(4):360-7.
Singer T, Barad DH, Weghofer A, Gleicher N. Correlation of antimullerian hormone and baseline follicle-stimulating hormone levels. Fertil Steril. 2009;91(6):2616-9.
Dumesic DA, Lesnick TG, Stassart JP, Ball GD, Wong A, Abbott DH. Intrafollicular antimullerian hormone levels predict follicle responsiveness to follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) in normoandrogenic ovulatory women undergoing gonadotropin releasing-hormone analog/recombinant human FSH therapy for in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer. Fertil Steril. 2009;92(1):217-21.
Journal of Reproduction & Infertility
Volume 23, Issue 1
Winter 2022
Pages 54-60