Anti-Müllerian hormone, antral follicle count and folliclestimulating hormone for predicting the number of oocytes retrieved in IVF/ICSI cycles

Objective To evaluate the efficacy of anti-Müllerian hormone（AMH）, antral follicle count（AFC） and follicle-stimulating hormone（FSH） for predicting the number of oocytes retrieved in in-vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection（IVF/ICSI）cycles.Methods In this retrospective study, a total of 122 infertile women were divided into two groups： group A, 〈35 years（n=71）; group B, ≥35 years（n=51）. AMH and FSH were determined on 2-5 d of the early menstrual cycle. AFC was tested on the second day of the menstrual cycle before the start of stimulation.Results Group B had higher FSH levels compared with group A（8.2±3.5 IU/L vs 6.8±2.4 IU/L, P〈0.05）. However, levels of AMH and AFC in group B were lower than those of group A（AMH： 4.2±3.5 μg/L vs 2.7±2.7 μg/L; AFC： 9.0±3.9 vs 5.4±3.3, P〈0.05）. The number of oocyte retrieved in the two groups was not significantly different（11.5±6.8 vs 9.6±6.9, P〉0.05）. The level of AMH was more strongly correlated with the number of oocytes retrieved than that of AFC or FSH level. The strengths of the correlation degrees were AMH level, AFC, and FSH level in turn（r=0.600, 0.511,-0.369）.Conclusion AMH would be a useful predictor for ovarian response.

A preliminary observation on efficacy of growth hormone on poor ovarian responders in IVF/ICSI cycles

Objective To determine efficacy of gonadotropin （Gn） co-treated with growth hormone （GH） on poor ovarian response （POR） patients undergoing in vitro fertiliza- tion/intracytoplasmic sperm injection （1VF/ICSI）. Methods A total of 58 IVF/ICSI-embryo transfer （ET） cycles in POR patients were retrospectively identified. The POR criteria were defined by Bologna consensus. The cycles were divided into two groups： Gn co-treated with GH group （GH~ group, 25 cycles） and Gn only group （GH- group, 33 cycles）. Results of lVF/ICSI for these two groups were compared. Results The number of oocyte retrieved and the normal fertilization rate in the two groups were no difference （P〉O.05）. High-quality embryo rate and implantation rate in the GH＋ group were 39.6% and 38.5%, respectively, which were slightly higher than those in the GH group （35.9% and 25.0%）, but no difference was found on these two parameters （P〉0. 05）. Conclusion GH, to some extent, can improve the quality of embryo and the implantation rate. Whether GH co-therapy has a definite role in improving the outcome of POR patients still needs further evaluation.