Clinical and Experimental Reproductive Medicine

The Korean Society for Reproductive Medicine (대한생식의학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Nomogram to predict the number of oocytes retrieved in controlled ovarian stimulation

  • Moon, Kyoung Yong (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Hoon (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Lee, Joong Yeup (Hamchoon Women's Clinic) ;
  • Lee, Jung Ryeol (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Jee, Byung Chul (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Suh, Chang Suk (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University College of Medicine) ;
  • Kim, Ki Chul (Hamchoon Women's Clinic) ;
  • Lee, Won Don (Seoul Maria Fertility Hospital) ;
  • Lim, Jin Ho (Seoul Maria Fertility Hospital) ;
  • Kim, Seok Hyun (Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Seoul National University College of Medicine)
  • Received : 2016.02.04
  • Accepted : 2016.02.26
  • Published : 2016.06.23
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Objective: Ovarian reserve tests are commonly used to predict ovarian response in infertile patients undergoing ovarian stimulation. Although serum markers such as basal follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) or random $anti-M{\ddot{u}}llerian$ hormone (AMH) level and ultrasonographic markers (antral follicle count, AFC) are good predictors, no single test has proven to be the best predictor. In this study, we developed appropriate equations and novel nomograms to predict the number of oocytes that will be retrieved using patients' age, serum levels of basal FSH and AMH, and AFC. Methods: We analyzed a database containing clinical and laboratory information of 141 stimulated in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles performed at a university-based hospital between September 2009 and December 2013. We used generalized linear models for prediction of the number of oocytes. Results: Age, basal serum FSH level, serum AMH level, and AFC were significantly related to the number of oocytes retrieved according to the univariate and multivariate analyses. The equations that predicted the number of oocytes retrieved (log scale) were as follows: model (1) $3.21-0.036{\times}(age)+0.089{\times}(AMH)$, model (2) $3.422-0.03{\times}(age)-0.049{\times}(FSH)+0.08{\times}(AMH)$, model (3) $2.32-0.017{\times}(age)+0.039{\times}(AMH)+0.03{\times}(AFC)$, model (4) $2.584-0.015{\times}(age)-0.035{\times}(FSH)+0.038{\times}(AMH)+0.026{\times}(AFC)$. model 4 showed the best performance. On the basis of these variables, we developed nomograms to predict the number of oocytes that can be retrieved. Conclusion: Our nomograms helped predict the number of oocytes retrieved in stimulated IVF cycles.

Keywords

References

  1. Broekmans FJ, Kwee J, Hendriks DJ, Mol BW, Lambalk CB. A systematic review of tests predicting ovarian reserve and IVF outcome. Hum Reprod Update 2006;12:685-718. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dml034
  2. Ebner T, Sommergruber M, Moser M, Shebl O, Schreier-Lechner E, Tews G. Basal level of anti-Mullerian hormone is associated with oocyte quality in stimulated cycles. Hum Reprod 2006;21:2022-6. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/del127
  3. Ficicioglu C, Kutlu T, Baglam E, Bakacak Z. Early follicular antimullerian hormone as an indicator of ovarian reserve. Fertil Steril 2006;85:592-6. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2005.09.019
  4. Gnoth C, Schuring AN, Friol K, Tigges J, Mallmann P, Godehardt E. Relevance of anti-Mullerian hormone measurement in a routine IVF program. Hum Reprod 2008;23:1359-65. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/den108
  5. Silberstein T, MacLaughlin DT, Shai I, Trimarchi JR, Lambert-Messerlian G, Seifer DB, et al. Mullerian inhibiting substance levels at the time of HCG administration in IVF cycles predict both ovarian reserve and embryo morphology. Hum Reprod 2006;21:159-63. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.humrep.a002489
  6. Nelson SM, Telfer EE, Anderson RA. The ageing ovary and uterus: new biological insights. Hum Reprod Update 2013;19:67-83. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dms043
  7. Leader B, Hegde A, Baca Q, Stone K, Lannon B, Seifer DB, et al. High frequency of discordance between antimullerian hormone and follicle-stimulating hormone levels in serum from estradiolconfirmed days 2 to 4 of the menstrual cycle from 5,354 women in U.S. fertility centers. Fertil Steril 2012;98:1037-42. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.06.006
  8. Scheffer GJ, Broekmans FJ, Dorland M, Habbema JD, Looman CW, te Velde ER. Antral follicle counts by transvaginal ultrasonography are related to age in women with proven natural fertility. Fertil Steril 1999;72:845-51. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(99)00396-9
  9. Frattarelli JL, Levi AJ, Miller BT, Segars JH. A prospective assessment of the predictive value of basal antral follicles in in vitro fertilization cycles. Fertil Steril 2003;80:350-5. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(03)00664-2
  10. Hendriks DJ, Mol BW, Bancsi LF, Te Velde ER, Broekmans FJ. Antral follicle count in the prediction of poor ovarian response and pregnancy after in vitro fertilization: a meta-analysis and comparison with basal follicle-stimulating hormone level. Fertil Steril 2005;83:291-301. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2004.10.011
  11. Kupesic S, Kurjak A, Bjelos D, Vujisic S. Three-dimensional ultrasonographic ovarian measurements and in vitro fertilization outcome are related to age. Fertil Steril 2003;79:190-7. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(02)04567-3
  12. McIlveen M, Skull JD, Ledger WL. Evaluation of the utility of multiple endocrine and ultrasound measures of ovarian reserve in the prediction of cycle cancellation in a high-risk IVF population. Hum Reprod 2007;22:778-85. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/del435
  13. Kumar A, Kalra B, Patel A, McDavid L, Roudebush WE. Development of a second generation anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) ELISA. J Immunol Methods 2010;362:51-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jim.2010.08.011
  14. Broer SL, van Disseldorp J, Broeze KA, Dolleman M, Opmeer BC, Bossuyt P, et al. Added value of ovarian reserve testing on patient characteristics in the prediction of ovarian response and ongoing pregnancy: an individual patient data approach. Hum Reprod Update 2013;19:26-36. https://doi.org/10.1093/humupd/dms041
  15. Buyuk E, Seifer DB, Younger J, Grazi RV, Lieman H. Random anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) is a predictor of ovarian response in women with elevated baseline early follicular follicle-stimulating hormone levels. Fertil Steril 2011;95:2369-72. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.03.071
  16. Howles CM, Saunders H, Alam V, Engrand P; FSH Treatment Guidelines Clinical Panel. Predictive factors and a corresponding treatment algorithm for controlled ovarian stimulation in patients treated with recombinant human follicle stimulating hormone (follitropin alfa) during assisted reproduction technology (ART) procedures: an analysis of 1378 patients. Curr Med Res Opin 2006;22:907-18. https://doi.org/10.1185/030079906X104678
  17. Olivennes F, Howles CM, Borini A, Germond M, Trew G, Wikland M, et al. Individualizing FSH dose for assisted reproduction using a novel algorithm: the CONSORT study. Reprod Biomed Online 2009;18:195-204. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1472-6483(10)60256-8
  18. Popovic-Todorovic B, Loft A, Lindhard A, Bangsboll S, Andersson AM, Andersen AN. A prospective study of predictive factors of ovarian response in ‘standard’ IVF/ICSI patients treated with recombinant FSH: a suggestion for a recombinant FSH dosage normogram. Hum Reprod 2003;18:781-7. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deg181
  19. La Marca A, Papaleo E, Grisendi V, Argento C, Giulini S, Volpe A. Development of a nomogram based on markers of ovarian reserve for the individualisation of the follicle-stimulating hormone starting dose in in vitro fertilisation cycles. BJOG 2012;119:1171-9. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-0528.2012.03412.x

Cited by

  1. Random start ovarian stimulation for fertility preservation appears unlikely to delay initiation of neoadjuvant chemotherapy for breast cancer vol.32, pp.10, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/dex276
  2. A retrospective analysis of the follicle-stimulating hormone starting dose in expected normal responders undergoing their first in vitro fertilization cycle: proposed dose versus empiric dose vol.45, pp.4, 2016, https://doi.org/10.5653/cerm.2018.45.4.183
  3. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of Chinese herbal medicine capsules for the treatment of premature ovarian insufficiency vol.25, pp.8, 2018, https://doi.org/10.1097/gme.0000000000001099
  4. Making IVF more effective through the evolution of prediction models: is prognosis the missing piece of the puzzle? vol.64, pp.5, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1080/19396368.2018.1504347
  5. Back-to-back random-start ovarian stimulation prior to chemotherapy to maximize oocyte yield vol.36, pp.6, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-019-01462-5
  6. Clinical application of serum anti-Müllerian hormone in women vol.46, pp.2, 2016, https://doi.org/10.5653/cerm.2019.46.2.50
  7. Thyroid Disorders and In Vitro Outcomes of Assisted Reproductive Technology: An Unfortunate Combination? vol.30, pp.8, 2016, https://doi.org/10.1089/thy.2019.0567
  8. Novel nomogram-based integrated gonadotropin therapy individualization in in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection: A modeling approach vol.48, pp.2, 2016, https://doi.org/10.5653/cerm.2020.03909
  9. The effects of luteinising hormone gene polymorphism on the outcomes of in vitro fertilisation and embryo transfer vol.41, pp.7, 2021, https://doi.org/10.1080/01443615.2020.1821619