AMH-based ovarian stimulation versus conventional ovarian stimulation for IVF/ICSI: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Cui, Ling; Lin, Yonghong; Lin, Jinli; Wang, Fang

doi:10.1007/s00404-020-05498-2

Cited by 6 publications

(2 citation statements)

References 23 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Cui et al reported that AMH‐based stimulation has the same results for pregnancy rate (relative risk 0.95) and risk of ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome (OHSS) (relative risk 0.68), and can reduce the dose of recombinant FSH (rFSH) and duration of stimulation (WMD −67.58, p = 0.02) in a meta‐analysis 40 . Another meta‐analysis similarly reported comparable ongoing pregnancy and possibly reduced OHSS in ovarian reserve test‐based algorithms compared with standard doses 41 (Table 6).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anti‐Müllerian hormone for screening, diagnosis, evaluation, and prediction: A systematic review and expert opinions

Iwase,

Asada,

Sugishita

et al. 2023

J of Obstet and Gynaecol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

AimTo present evidence‐based recommendations for anti‐Müllerian hormone (AMH) measurement as an ovarian reserve test.MethodsA systematic literature search for the clinical utility of AMH was conducted in PubMed from its inception to August 2022 to identify studies, including meta‐analyses, reviews, randomized controlled trials, and clinical trials, followed by an additional systematic search using keywords. Based on this evidence, an expert panel developed clinical questions (CQs).ResultsA total of 1895 studies were identified and 95 articles were included to establish expert opinions subdivided into general population, infertility treatment, primary ovarian insufficiency, polycystic ovary syndrome, surgery, and oncofertility. We developed 13 CQs and 1 future research question with levels of evidence and recommendations.ConclusionThe findings of the current systematic review covered the clinical utility of AMH including its screening, diagnosis, evaluation, and prediction. Although some clinical implications of AMH remain debatable, these expert opinions may help promote a better understanding of AMH and establish its clinical significance.

show abstract

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Anti‐Müllerian hormone for screening, diagnosis, evaluation, and prediction: A systematic review and expert opinions

Iwase,

Asada,

Sugishita

et al. 2023

J of Obstet and Gynaecol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…[ 1 ] Circulating AMH is widely accepted as a reliable marker for ovarian reserve, which can predict response to controlled ovarian stimulation (COS) and is currently used globally in clinical practice to predict in vitro -fertilisation (IVF) outcomes. [ 2 3 ] However, the predictive accuracy of AMH in women undergoing IVF remains uncertain with conflicting literature data. A major factor contributing to the variation between studies is the heterogeneity in patient populations included in various studies.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%