AMH ve Over Rezerv Testleri
Özet
Over rezervi, overde kalan oosit sayısı veya oosit miktarı olarak tanımlanır. Bu rezerv, doğumdan itibaren primordial folliküllerin zamanla genetik faktörlere, çevresel etkenlere, geçirilen cerrahi işlemlere, enfeksiyonlara, kemoterapi veya radyoterapi gibi çeşitli nedenlere bağlı olarak zamanla azalarak değişkenlik göstermektedir. Over rezervini etkileyen birçok faktör olmasına rağmen yaş bunlardan en önemlisidir. Over rezervinin değerlendirilmesi, infertilite yönetimi, yardımcı üreme tekniklerine (ART) aday belirleme ve bireyselleştirilmiş tedavi protokollerinin oluşturulmasında büyük önem taşımaktadır. Over rezervinin değerlendirilmesinde serum follikül stimülan hormon (FSH), anti-Müllerien hormon (AMH), Clomiphene citrate challange test (CCCT) ve antral follikül sayımı (AFC) gibi biyokimyasal ve ultrasonografik değerlendirmeler kullanılabilmektedir.
Ovarian reserve is defined as the number of oocytes or the amount of oocytes remaining in the ovary. This reserve varies over time, depending on various factors such as genetic factors, environmental factors, surgical procedures, infections, chemotherapy or radiotherapy, as the primordial follicles decrease from birth. Although there are many factors affecting ovarian reserve, age is the most important of them. The evaluation of ovarian reserve is of great importance in infertility management, determining candidates for assisted reproductive techniques (ART), and creating individualised treatment protocols. Biochemical and ultrasonographic evaluations such as serum follicle stimulating hormone (FSH), anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH), Clomiphene citrate challenge test (CCCT), and antral follicle count (AFC) can be used in the evaluation of ovarian reserve.
Referanslar
Hansen KR, Craig LB, Zavy MT, Klein NA, Soules MR. Ovarian primordial and nongrowing follicle counts according to the Stages of Reproductive Aging Workshop (STRAW) staging system. Menopause (New York, NY). Feb 2012;19(2):164-71. doi:10.1097/gme.0b013e31823b0b2e
Abdalla H, Thum MY. An elevated basal FSH reflects a quantitative rather than qualitative decline of the ovarian reserve. Human reproduction (Oxford, England). Apr 2004;19(4):893-8. doi:10.1093/humrep/deh141
Broekmans FJ, Kwee J, Hendriks DJ, Mol BW, Lambalk CB. A systematic review of tests predicting ovarian reserve and IVF outcome. Human reproduction update. Nov-Dec 2006;12(6):685-718. doi:10.1093/humupd/dml034
Licciardi FL, Liu HC, Rosenwaks Z. Day 3 estradiol serum concentrations as prognosticators of ovarian stimulation response and pregnancy outcome in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization. Fertility and sterility. Nov 1995;64(5):991-4. doi:10.1016/s0015-0282(16)57916-3
Smotrich DB, Widra EA, Gindoff PR, Levy MJ, Hall JL, Stillman RJ. Prognostic value of day 3 estradiol on in vitro fertilization outcome. Fertility and sterility. Dec 1995;64(6):1136-40.
Freeman EW, Sammel MD, Gracia CR, et al. Follicular phase hormone levels and menstrual bleeding status in the approach to menopause. Fertility and sterility. Feb 2005;83(2):383-92. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2004.06.066
Dewailly D, Andersen CY, Balen A, et al. The physiology and clinical utility of anti-Mullerian hormone in women. Human reproduction update. May-Jun 2014;20(3):370-85. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmt062
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. Fertility and sterility. Feb 2011;95(2):747-50. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.10.011
de Vet A, Laven JS, de Jong FH, Themmen AP, Fauser BC. Antimüllerian hormone serum levels: a putative marker for ovarian aging. Fertility and sterility. Feb 2002;77(2):357-62. doi:10.1016/s0015-0282(01)02993-4
Anckaert E, Smitz J, Schiettecatte J, Klein BM, Arce JC. The value of anti-Mullerian hormone measurement in the long GnRH agonist protocol: association with ovarian response and gonadotrophin-dose adjustments. Human reproduction (Oxford, England). Jun 2012;27(6):1829-39. doi:10.1093/humrep/des101
Nardo LG, Gelbaya TA, Wilkinson H, et al. Circulating basal anti-Müllerian hormone levels as predictor of ovarian response in women undergoing ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization. Fertility and sterility. Nov 2009;92(5):1586-93. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.08.127
Broer SL, Dólleman M, Opmeer BC, Fauser BC, Mol BW, Broekmans FJ. AMH and AFC as predictors of excessive response in controlled ovarian hyperstimulation: a meta-analysis. Human reproduction update. Jan-Feb 2011;17(1):46-54. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmq034
Iliodromiti S, Kelsey TW, Wu O, Anderson RA, Nelson SM. The predictive accuracy of anti-Müllerian hormone for live birth after assisted conception: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. Human reproduction update. Jul-Aug 2014;20(4):560-70. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmu003
Steiner AZ, Pritchard D, Stanczyk FZ, et al. Association Between Biomarkers of Ovarian Reserve and Infertility Among Older Women of Reproductive Age. Jama. Oct 10 2017;318(14):1367-1376. doi:10.1001/jama.2017.14588
Lutchman Singh K, Muttukrishna S, Stein RC, et al. Predictors of ovarian reserve in young women with breast cancer. British journal of cancer. Jun 18 2007;96(12):1808-16. doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6603814
Nelson SM, Iliodromiti S, Fleming R, Anderson R, McConnachie A, Messow CM. Reference range for the antimüllerian hormone Generation II assay: a population study of 10,984 women, with comparison to the established Diagnostics Systems Laboratory nomogram. Fertility and sterility. Feb 2014;101(2):523-9. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.10.021
Rustamov O, Smith A, Roberts SA, et al. Anti-Mullerian hormone: poor assay reproducibility in a large cohort of subjects suggests sample instability. Human reproduction (Oxford, England). Oct 2012;27(10):3085-91. doi:10.1093/humrep/des260
Su HI, Sammel MD, Homer MV, Bui K, Haunschild C, Stanczyk FZ. Comparability of antimüllerian hormone levels among commercially available immunoassays. Fertility and sterility. Jun 2014;101(6):1766-72.e1. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.02.046
Toner JP, Seifer DB. Why we may abandon basal follicle-stimulating hormone testing: a sea change in determining ovarian reserve using antimüllerian hormone. Fertility and sterility. Jun 2013;99(7):1825-30. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.03.001
Jain T, Soules MR, Collins JA. Comparison of basal follicle-stimulating hormone versus the clomiphene citrate challenge test for ovarian reserve screening. Fertility and sterility. Jul 2004;82(1):180-5. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2003.11.045
Hendriks DJ, Mol BW, Bancsi LF, te Velde ER, Broekmans FJ. The clomiphene citrate challenge test for the prediction of poor ovarian response and nonpregnancy in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization: a systematic review. Fertility and sterility. Oct 2006;86(4):807-18. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2006.03.033
La Marca A, Sunkara SK. Individualization of controlled ovarian stimulation in IVF using ovarian reserve markers: from theory to practice. Human reproduction update. Jan-Feb 2014;20(1):124-40. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmt037
Jayaprakasan K, Campbell B, Hopkisson J, Clewes J, Johnson I, Raine-Fenning N. Establishing the intercycle variability of three-dimensional ultrasonographic predictors of ovarian reserve. Fertility and sterility. Dec 2008;90(6):2126-32. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.10.028
Testing and interpreting measures of ovarian reserve: a committee opinion. Fertility and sterility. Dec 2020;114(6):1151-1157. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2020.09.134
Ripley M, Lanes A, Léveillé MC, Shmorgun D. Does ovarian reserve predict egg quality in unstimulated therapeutic donor insemination cycles? Fertility and sterility. May 2015;103(5):1170-5.e2. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.01.018
van der Steeg JW, Steures P, Eijkemans MJC, et al. Predictive Value and Clinical Impact of Basal Follicle-Stimulating Hormone in Subfertile, Ovulatory Women. The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism. 2007;92(6):2163-2168. doi:10.1210/jc.2006-2399
Haadsma ML, Groen H, Fidler V, et al. The predictive value of ovarian reserve tests for spontaneous pregnancy in subfertile ovulatory women. Human Reproduction. 2008;23(8):1800-1807. doi:10.1093/humrep/den234
Magendzo A, Schwarze JE, Diaz de la Vega C, Altieri E, Zegers-Hochschild F, Balmaceda JP. Clomiphene citrate challenge test predicts outcome of intrauterine insemination in women aged under 37 years. Reproductive biomedicine online. Apr 2006;12(4):423-7. doi:10.1016/s1472-6483(10)61994-3
Dinelli L, Courbière B, Achard V, et al. Prognosis factors of pregnancy after intrauterine insemination with the husband's sperm: conclusions of an analysis of 2,019 cycles. Fertility and sterility. Apr 2014;101(4):994-1000. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.01.009
Hansen KR, He AL, Styer AK, et al. Predictors of pregnancy and live-birth in couples with unexplained infertility after ovarian stimulation-intrauterine insemination. Fertility and sterility. Jun 2016;105(6):1575-1583.e2. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.02.020
Broer SL, Dólleman M, Opmeer BC, Fauser BC, Mol BW, Broekmans FJM. AMH and AFC as predictors of excessive response in controlled ovarian hyperstimulation: a meta-analysis. Human reproduction update. 2010;17(1):46-54. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmq034
Seifer DB, Tal O, Wantman E, Edul P, Baker VL. Prognostic indicators of assisted reproduction technology outcomes of cycles with ultralow serum antimüllerian hormone: a multivariate analysis of over 5,000 autologous cycles from the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcome Reporting System database for 2012-2013. Fertility and sterility. Feb 2016;105(2):385-93.e3. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.10.004
Tal R, Tal O, Seifer BJ, Seifer DB. Antimüllerian hormone as predictor of implantation and clinical pregnancy after assisted conception: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertility and sterility. Jan 2015;103(1):119-30.e3. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.09.041
Testing and interpreting measures of ovarian reserve: a committee opinion. Fertility and sterility. Mar 2015;103(3):e9-e17. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.12.093
Ferraretti AP, La Marca A, Fauser BC, Tarlatzis B, Nargund G, Gianaroli L. ESHRE consensus on the definition of 'poor response' to ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: the Bologna criteria. Human reproduction (Oxford, England). Jul 2011;26(7):1616-24. doi:10.1093/humrep/der092
Reijnders IF, Nelen WL, IntHout J, van Herwaarden AE, Braat DD, Fleischer K. The value of Anti-Müllerian hormone in low and extremely low ovarian reserve in relation to live birth after in vitro fertilization. European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology. May 2016;200:45-50. doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2016.02.007
Referanslar
Hansen KR, Craig LB, Zavy MT, Klein NA, Soules MR. Ovarian primordial and nongrowing follicle counts according to the Stages of Reproductive Aging Workshop (STRAW) staging system. Menopause (New York, NY). Feb 2012;19(2):164-71. doi:10.1097/gme.0b013e31823b0b2e
Abdalla H, Thum MY. An elevated basal FSH reflects a quantitative rather than qualitative decline of the ovarian reserve. Human reproduction (Oxford, England). Apr 2004;19(4):893-8. doi:10.1093/humrep/deh141
Broekmans FJ, Kwee J, Hendriks DJ, Mol BW, Lambalk CB. A systematic review of tests predicting ovarian reserve and IVF outcome. Human reproduction update. Nov-Dec 2006;12(6):685-718. doi:10.1093/humupd/dml034
Licciardi FL, Liu HC, Rosenwaks Z. Day 3 estradiol serum concentrations as prognosticators of ovarian stimulation response and pregnancy outcome in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization. Fertility and sterility. Nov 1995;64(5):991-4. doi:10.1016/s0015-0282(16)57916-3
Smotrich DB, Widra EA, Gindoff PR, Levy MJ, Hall JL, Stillman RJ. Prognostic value of day 3 estradiol on in vitro fertilization outcome. Fertility and sterility. Dec 1995;64(6):1136-40.
Freeman EW, Sammel MD, Gracia CR, et al. Follicular phase hormone levels and menstrual bleeding status in the approach to menopause. Fertility and sterility. Feb 2005;83(2):383-92. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2004.06.066
Dewailly D, Andersen CY, Balen A, et al. The physiology and clinical utility of anti-Mullerian hormone in women. Human reproduction update. May-Jun 2014;20(3):370-85. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmt062
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. Fertility and sterility. Feb 2011;95(2):747-50. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.10.011
de Vet A, Laven JS, de Jong FH, Themmen AP, Fauser BC. Antimüllerian hormone serum levels: a putative marker for ovarian aging. Fertility and sterility. Feb 2002;77(2):357-62. doi:10.1016/s0015-0282(01)02993-4
Anckaert E, Smitz J, Schiettecatte J, Klein BM, Arce JC. The value of anti-Mullerian hormone measurement in the long GnRH agonist protocol: association with ovarian response and gonadotrophin-dose adjustments. Human reproduction (Oxford, England). Jun 2012;27(6):1829-39. doi:10.1093/humrep/des101
Nardo LG, Gelbaya TA, Wilkinson H, et al. Circulating basal anti-Müllerian hormone levels as predictor of ovarian response in women undergoing ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization. Fertility and sterility. Nov 2009;92(5):1586-93. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2008.08.127
Broer SL, Dólleman M, Opmeer BC, Fauser BC, Mol BW, Broekmans FJ. AMH and AFC as predictors of excessive response in controlled ovarian hyperstimulation: a meta-analysis. Human reproduction update. Jan-Feb 2011;17(1):46-54. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmq034
Iliodromiti S, Kelsey TW, Wu O, Anderson RA, Nelson SM. The predictive accuracy of anti-Müllerian hormone for live birth after assisted conception: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. Human reproduction update. Jul-Aug 2014;20(4):560-70. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmu003
Steiner AZ, Pritchard D, Stanczyk FZ, et al. Association Between Biomarkers of Ovarian Reserve and Infertility Among Older Women of Reproductive Age. Jama. Oct 10 2017;318(14):1367-1376. doi:10.1001/jama.2017.14588
Lutchman Singh K, Muttukrishna S, Stein RC, et al. Predictors of ovarian reserve in young women with breast cancer. British journal of cancer. Jun 18 2007;96(12):1808-16. doi:10.1038/sj.bjc.6603814
Nelson SM, Iliodromiti S, Fleming R, Anderson R, McConnachie A, Messow CM. Reference range for the antimüllerian hormone Generation II assay: a population study of 10,984 women, with comparison to the established Diagnostics Systems Laboratory nomogram. Fertility and sterility. Feb 2014;101(2):523-9. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.10.021
Rustamov O, Smith A, Roberts SA, et al. Anti-Mullerian hormone: poor assay reproducibility in a large cohort of subjects suggests sample instability. Human reproduction (Oxford, England). Oct 2012;27(10):3085-91. doi:10.1093/humrep/des260
Su HI, Sammel MD, Homer MV, Bui K, Haunschild C, Stanczyk FZ. Comparability of antimüllerian hormone levels among commercially available immunoassays. Fertility and sterility. Jun 2014;101(6):1766-72.e1. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.02.046
Toner JP, Seifer DB. Why we may abandon basal follicle-stimulating hormone testing: a sea change in determining ovarian reserve using antimüllerian hormone. Fertility and sterility. Jun 2013;99(7):1825-30. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.03.001
Jain T, Soules MR, Collins JA. Comparison of basal follicle-stimulating hormone versus the clomiphene citrate challenge test for ovarian reserve screening. Fertility and sterility. Jul 2004;82(1):180-5. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2003.11.045
Hendriks DJ, Mol BW, Bancsi LF, te Velde ER, Broekmans FJ. The clomiphene citrate challenge test for the prediction of poor ovarian response and nonpregnancy in patients undergoing in vitro fertilization: a systematic review. Fertility and sterility. Oct 2006;86(4):807-18. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2006.03.033
La Marca A, Sunkara SK. Individualization of controlled ovarian stimulation in IVF using ovarian reserve markers: from theory to practice. Human reproduction update. Jan-Feb 2014;20(1):124-40. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmt037
Jayaprakasan K, Campbell B, Hopkisson J, Clewes J, Johnson I, Raine-Fenning N. Establishing the intercycle variability of three-dimensional ultrasonographic predictors of ovarian reserve. Fertility and sterility. Dec 2008;90(6):2126-32. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.10.028
Testing and interpreting measures of ovarian reserve: a committee opinion. Fertility and sterility. Dec 2020;114(6):1151-1157. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2020.09.134
Ripley M, Lanes A, Léveillé MC, Shmorgun D. Does ovarian reserve predict egg quality in unstimulated therapeutic donor insemination cycles? Fertility and sterility. May 2015;103(5):1170-5.e2. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.01.018
van der Steeg JW, Steures P, Eijkemans MJC, et al. Predictive Value and Clinical Impact of Basal Follicle-Stimulating Hormone in Subfertile, Ovulatory Women. The Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism. 2007;92(6):2163-2168. doi:10.1210/jc.2006-2399
Haadsma ML, Groen H, Fidler V, et al. The predictive value of ovarian reserve tests for spontaneous pregnancy in subfertile ovulatory women. Human Reproduction. 2008;23(8):1800-1807. doi:10.1093/humrep/den234
Magendzo A, Schwarze JE, Diaz de la Vega C, Altieri E, Zegers-Hochschild F, Balmaceda JP. Clomiphene citrate challenge test predicts outcome of intrauterine insemination in women aged under 37 years. Reproductive biomedicine online. Apr 2006;12(4):423-7. doi:10.1016/s1472-6483(10)61994-3
Dinelli L, Courbière B, Achard V, et al. Prognosis factors of pregnancy after intrauterine insemination with the husband's sperm: conclusions of an analysis of 2,019 cycles. Fertility and sterility. Apr 2014;101(4):994-1000. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.01.009
Hansen KR, He AL, Styer AK, et al. Predictors of pregnancy and live-birth in couples with unexplained infertility after ovarian stimulation-intrauterine insemination. Fertility and sterility. Jun 2016;105(6):1575-1583.e2. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.02.020
Broer SL, Dólleman M, Opmeer BC, Fauser BC, Mol BW, Broekmans FJM. AMH and AFC as predictors of excessive response in controlled ovarian hyperstimulation: a meta-analysis. Human reproduction update. 2010;17(1):46-54. doi:10.1093/humupd/dmq034
Seifer DB, Tal O, Wantman E, Edul P, Baker VL. Prognostic indicators of assisted reproduction technology outcomes of cycles with ultralow serum antimüllerian hormone: a multivariate analysis of over 5,000 autologous cycles from the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcome Reporting System database for 2012-2013. Fertility and sterility. Feb 2016;105(2):385-93.e3. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.10.004
Tal R, Tal O, Seifer BJ, Seifer DB. Antimüllerian hormone as predictor of implantation and clinical pregnancy after assisted conception: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertility and sterility. Jan 2015;103(1):119-30.e3. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.09.041
Testing and interpreting measures of ovarian reserve: a committee opinion. Fertility and sterility. Mar 2015;103(3):e9-e17. doi:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.12.093
Ferraretti AP, La Marca A, Fauser BC, Tarlatzis B, Nargund G, Gianaroli L. ESHRE consensus on the definition of 'poor response' to ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: the Bologna criteria. Human reproduction (Oxford, England). Jul 2011;26(7):1616-24. doi:10.1093/humrep/der092
Reijnders IF, Nelen WL, IntHout J, van Herwaarden AE, Braat DD, Fleischer K. The value of Anti-Müllerian hormone in low and extremely low ovarian reserve in relation to live birth after in vitro fertilization. European journal of obstetrics, gynecology, and reproductive biology. May 2016;200:45-50. doi:10.1016/j.ejogrb.2016.02.007
