Volume 16, Issue 8 (August 2018)                   IJRM 2018, 16(8): 483-490 | Back to browse issues page

XML Persian Abstract Print

Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Tabibnejad N, Soleimani M, Aflatoonian A. Serum Anti-Mullerian hormone and embryo morphokinetics detecting by time-lapse imaging: A comparison between the polycystic ovarian syndrome and tubal factor infertility. IJRM. 2018; 16 (8) :483-490
URL: http://journals.ssu.ac.ir/ijrmnew/article-1-1197-en.html
1- Research and Clinical Center for Infertility, Yazd Reproductive Sciences Institute, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran, Iran
2- Research and Clinical Center for Infertility, Yazd Reproductive Sciences Institute, Shahid Sadoughi University of Medical Sciences, Yazd, Iran, iran , abbas-aflatoonian@ssu.ac.ir
Abstract:   (198 Views)
Background: Anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) is considered as a good marker for quantitative evaluation of ovarian response to the stimulation during assisted reproductive technology cycles.
Objective: To evaluate the association between serum AMH level and embryo morphokinetics using time-lapse imaging and intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) outcomes in women with polycystic ovarian syndrome (PCOS).
Materials and Methods: We evaluated a total of 547 embryos from 100 women underwent ICSI cycles; 50 women with PCOS and 50 women with tubal factor infertility. Serum AMH level was measured in all participants. Time-laps records were annotated for time to pronuclear fading (tPNf), time to 2-8 cells (t2-t8), reverse cleavage, direct cleavage, and also for the presence of multinucleation.
Results: AMH was negatively correlated with t5, t8, and the third cell cycle (p=0.02, p=0.02, and p=0.01; respectively) in PCOS group. AMH had no correlation with embryo kinetics in infertile women with tubal factor infertility. Moreover, AMH level is similar between embryos with and without direct cleavage as well as reverse cleavage and Multinucleation in both groups. The Receiver operating characteristic curves analyses indicated that AMH was not an accurate predictor of clinical pregnancy as well as a live birth (AUC=0.59 [95% CI, 0.42-0.76]) in PCOS women. However, in the women with tubal factor infertility AMH showed a fair prediction value for clinical pregnancy (AUC=0.64 [95% CI, 0.48-0.82]) along with the live birth (AUC=0.70 [95% CI, 0.55-0.85]).
Conclusion: Some of the time-lapse embryo parameters may be related to the AMH concentration. However, AMH is not an accurate tool to predict the ICSI outcomes in PCOS women.
Full-Text [PDF 435 kb]   (79 Downloads) |   |   Full-Text (HTML)  (24 Views)  
Type of Study: Original Article |
Received: 2018/09/13 | Accepted: 2018/09/13 | Published: 2018/09/13

1. La Marca A, Sighinolfi G, Radi D, Argento C, Baraldi E, Artenisio AC, et al. Anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) as a predictive marker in assisted reproductive technology (ART). Hum Reprod Update 2010; 16: 113-130. [DOI:10.1093/humupd/dmp036]
2. 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: 77-83. [DOI:10.1093/molehr/gah015]
3. Dewailly D, Andersen CY, Balen A, Broekmans F, Dilaver N, Fanchin R, et al. The physiology and clinical utility of anti-Mullerian hormone in women. Hum Reprod Update 2014; 20: 370-385. [DOI:10.1093/humupd/dmt062]
4. La Marca A, Volpe A. Anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) in female reproduction: is a measurement of circulating AMH a useful tool? Clin Endocrinol (Oxf) 2006; 64: 603-610. [DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2265.2006.02533.x]
5. Nelson SM, Anderson RA, Broekmans FJ, Raine-Fenning N, Fleming R, La Marca A. Anti-Mullerian hormone: clairvoyance or crystal clear? Hum Reprod 2012; 27: 631-636. [DOI:10.1093/humrep/der446]
6. Broer SL, Dolleman M, Opmeer BC, Fauser BC, Mol BW, Broekmans FJ. AMH and AFC as predictors of excessive response in controlled ovarian hyperstimulation: a meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update 2011; 17: 46-54. [DOI:10.1093/humupd/dmq034]
7. 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: 1295-1301. [DOI:10.1007/s00404-011-1979-6]
8. Lin WQ, Yao LN, Zhang DX, Zhang W, Yang XJ, Yu R. The predictive value of anti-Mullerian hormone on embryo quality, blastocyst development, and pregnancy rate following in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET). J Assist Reprod Genet 2013; 30: 649-655. [DOI:10.1007/s10815-013-9973-5]
9. 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. Hum Reprod 2012; 27: 1829-1839. [DOI:10.1093/humrep/des101]
10. Arce JC, La Marca A, Mirner Klein B, Nyboe Andersen A, Fleming R. Antimullerian hormone in gonadotropin releasing-hormone antagonist cycles: prediction of ovarian response and cumulative treatment outcome in good-prognosis patients. Fertil Steril 2013; 99: 1644-1653. [DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2012.12.048]
11. Riggs R, Kimble T, Oehninger S, Bocca S, Zhao Y, Leader B, et al. Anti-Mullerian hormone serum levels predict response to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation but not embryo quality or pregnancy outcome in oocyte donation. Fertil Steril 2011; 95: 410-412. [DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2010.07.1042]
12. Wang JG, Douglas NC, Nakhuda GS, Choi JM, Park SJ, Thornton MH, et al. The association between anti-Mullerian hormone and IVF pregnancy outcomes is influenced by age. Reprod Biomed Online 2010; 21: 757-761. [DOI:10.1016/j.rbmo.2010.06.041]
13. Wunder DM, Guibourdenche J, Birkhauser MH, Bersinger NA. Anti-Mullerian hormone and inhibin B as predictors of pregnancy after treatment by in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Fertil Steril 2008; 90: 2203-2210. [DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2007.10.078]
14. Smeenk JM, Sweep FC, Zielhuis GA, Kremer JA, Thomas CM, Braat DD. Antimullerian hormone predicts ovarian responsiveness, but not embryo quality or pregnancy, after in vitro fertilization or intracyoplasmic sperm injection. Fertil Steril 2007; 87: 223-226. [DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2006.06.019]
15. Webber LJ, Stubbs S, Stark J, Trew GH, Margara R, Hardy K, et al. Formation and early development of follicles in the polycystic ovary. Lancet 2003; 362: 1017-1021. [DOI:10.1016/S0140-6736(03)14410-8]
16. Wachs DS, Coffler MS, Malcom PJ, Chang RJ. Serum anti-mullerian hormone concentrations are not altered by acute administration of follicle stimulating hormone in polycystic ovary syndrome and normal women. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2007; 92: 1871-1874. [DOI:10.1210/jc.2006-2425]
17. Tal R, Tal O, Seifer BJ, Seifer DB. Antimullerian hormone as predictor of implantation and clinical pregnancy after assisted conception: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril 2015; 103: 119-130. [DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2014.09.041]
18. Fishel S, Campbell A, Montgomery S, Smith R, Nice L, Duffy S, et al. Live births after embryo selection using morphokinetics versus conventional morphology: a retrospective analysis. Reprod Biomed Online 2017; 35: 407-416. [DOI:10.1016/j.rbmo.2017.06.009]
19. Pribenszky C, Nilselid AM, Montag M. Time-lapse culture with morphokinetic embryo selection improves pregnancy and live birth chances and reduces early pregnancy loss: a meta-analysis. Reprod Biomed Online 2017; 35: 511-520. [DOI:10.1016/j.rbmo.2017.06.022]
20. Rotterdam ESHRE/ASRM-Sponsored PCOS consensus workshop group. Revised 2003 consensus on diagnostic criteria and long-term health risks related to polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS). Hum Reprod 2004; 19: 41-47. [DOI:10.1093/humrep/deh098]
21. Eftekhar M, Aflatoonian A, Mohammadian F, Eftekhar T. Adjuvant growth hormone therapy in antagonist protocol in poor responders undergoing assisted reproductive technology. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2013; 287: 1017-1021. [DOI:10.1007/s00404-012-2655-1]
22. Nikmard F, Aflatoonian B, Hosseini E, Aflatoonian A, Bakhtiyari M, Aflatoonian R. A comparative study on the results of agonist and antagonist protocols based on serum AMH levels in patients undergoing intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Int J Reprod Biomed 2016; 14: 769-776. [DOI:10.29252/ijrm.14.12.769]
23. Davar R, Oskouian H, Ahmadi S, Dehghani Firouzabadi R. GnRH antagonist/letrozole versus microdose GnRH agonist flare protocol in poor responders undergoing in vitro fertilization. Taiwan J Obstet Gynecol 2010; 49: 297-301. [DOI:10.1016/S1028-4559(10)60064-2]
24. Practice Committee of the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Electronic address Aao, Practice Committee of the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology. Guidance on the limits to the number of embryos to transfer: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril 2017; 107: 901-903. [DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2017.02.107]
25. Adamson GD, Abusief ME, Palao L, Witmer J, Palao LM, Gvakharia M. Improved implantation rates of day 3 embryo transfers with the use of an automated time-lapse-enabled test to aid in embryo selection. Fertil Steril 2016; 105: 369-375. [DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.10.030]
26. Motato Y, de los Santos MJ, Escriba MJ, Ruiz BA, Remohi J, Meseguer M. Morphokinetic analysis and embryonic prediction for blastocyst formation through an integrated time-lapse system. Fertil Steril 2016; 105: 376-384. [DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2015.11.001]
27. Brodin T, Hadziosmanovic N, Berglund L, Olovsson M, Holte J. Antimullerian hormone levels are strongly associated with live-birth rates after assisted reproduction. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 2013; 98: 1107-1114. [DOI:10.1210/jc.2012-3676]
28. Bhide P, Escriba M, Srikantharajah A, Joshi H, Gudi A, Shah A, et al. Anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) and embryo quality assessed by time-lapse imaging (TLI): a cross-sectional observational study. Arch Gynecol Obstet 2017; 296: 583-587. [DOI:10.1007/s00404-017-4453-2]
29. Meseguer M, Herrero J, Tejera A, Hilligsoe KM, Ramsing NB, Remohi J. The use of morphokinetics as a predictor of embryo implantation. Hum Reprod 2011; 26: 2658-2671. [DOI:10.1093/humrep/der256]
30. Lekamge DN, Barry M, Kolo M, Lane M, Gilchrist RB, Tremellen KP. Anti-Mullerian hormone as a predictor of IVF outcome. Reprod Biomed Online 2007; 14: 602-610. [DOI:10.1016/S1472-6483(10)61053-X]
31. 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: 159-163. [DOI:10.1093/humrep/dei270]
32. Aydin GA, Yavuz A, Terzi H, Kutlu T. Assessment of the relationship of basal serum anti-mullerian hormone levels with oocyte quality and pregnancy outcomes in patients undergoing ICSI. Iran J Reprod Med 2015; 13: 231-236.
33. 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: 2022-2026. [DOI:10.1093/humrep/del127]
34. Hazout A, Bouchard P, Seifer DB, Aussage P, Junca AM, Cohen-Bacrie P. Serum antimullerian hormone/ mullerian-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: 1323-1329. [DOI:10.1016/j.fertnstert.2004.03.061]
35. Seifer DB, MacLaughlin DT, Christian BP, Feng B, Shelden RM. Early follicular serum mullerian-inhibiting substance levels are associated with ovarian response during assisted reproductive technology cycles. Fertil Steril 2002; 77: 468-471. [DOI:10.1016/S0015-0282(01)03201-0]
36. Keane K, Cruzat VF, Wagle S, Chaudhary N, Newsholme P, Yovich J. Specific ranges of anti-Mullerian hormone and antral follicle count correlate to provide a prognostic indicator for IVF outcome. Reprod Biol 2017; 17: 51-59. [DOI:10.1016/j.repbio.2016.12.002]
37. Lukaszuk K, Liss J, Kunicki M, Jakiel G, Wasniewski T, Woclawek-Potocka I, et al. Anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) is a strong predictor of live birth in women undergoing assisted reproductive technology. Reprod Biol 2014; 14: 176-181. [DOI:10.1016/j.repbio.2014.03.004]
38. Iliodromiti S, Kelsey TW, Wu O, Anderson RA, Nelson SM. The predictive accuracy of anti-Mullerian hormone for live birth after assisted conception: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. Hum Reprod Update 2014; 20: 560-570. [DOI:10.1093/humupd/dmu003]
39. Arabzadeh S, Hossein G, Rashidi BH, Hosseini MA, Zeraati H. Comparing serum basal and follicular fluid levels of anti-Mullerian hormone as a predictor of in vitro fertilization outcomes in patients with and without polycystic ovary syndrome. Ann Saudi Med 2010; 30: 442-447.
40. Chen Y, Ye B, Yang X, Zheng J, Lin J, Zhao J. Predicting the outcome of different protocols of in vitro fertilization with anti-Muullerian hormone levels in patients with polycystic ovary syndrome. J Int Med Res 2017; 45: 1138-1147. [DOI:10.1177/0300060517704140]
41. Sahmay S, Guralp O, Aydogan B, Cepni I, Oral E, Irez T. Anti-Mullerian hormone and polycystic ovary syndrome: assessment of the clinical pregnancy rates in in vitro fertilization patients. Gynecol Endocrinol 2013; 29: 440-443. [DOI:10.3109/09513590.2013.769519]
42. Tal R, Seifer DB, Khanimov M, Malter HE, Grazi RV, Leader B. Characterization of women with elevated antimullerian hormone levels (AMH): correlation of AMH with polycystic ovarian syndrome phenotypes and assisted reproductive technology outcomes. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2014; 211: 59 e1-8.

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:

Send email to the article author

© 2018 All Rights Reserved | International Journal of Reproductive BioMedicine

Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb