Cargando…
Comparison of anti-Müllerian hormone and antral follicle count in the prediction of ovarian response: a systematic review and meta-analysis
BACKGROUND: Increasingly studies reported that the Anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) seems to be a promising and reliable marker of functional ovarian follicle reserve, even better than the AFC test. Our study aimed to conduct a meta-analysis to assess the predictive value of AMH and AFC for predicting p...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10294345/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37370145 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13048-023-01202-5 |
_version_ | 1785063175205421056 |
---|---|
author | Liu, Yang Pan, Zhengmei Wu, Yanzhi Song, Jiamei Chen, Jingsi |
author_facet | Liu, Yang Pan, Zhengmei Wu, Yanzhi Song, Jiamei Chen, Jingsi |
author_sort | Liu, Yang |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Increasingly studies reported that the Anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) seems to be a promising and reliable marker of functional ovarian follicle reserve, even better than the AFC test. Our study aimed to conduct a meta-analysis to assess the predictive value of AMH and AFC for predicting poor or high response in IVF treatment. An electronic search was conducted, and the following databases were used: PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library (up to 7 May 2022). The bivariate regression model was used to calculate the pooled sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve. Subgroup analyses and meta-regression also were used in the presented study. Overall performance was assessed by estimating pooled ROC curves between AMH and AFC. RESULTS: Forty-two studies were eligible for this meta-analysis. Comparison of the summary estimates for the prediction of poor or high response showed significant difference in performance for AMH compared with AFC [poor (sensitivity: 0.80 vs 0.74, P < 0.050; specificity: 0.81 vs 0.85, P < 0.001); high (sensitivity: 0.81 vs 0.87, P < 0.001)]. However, there were no significant differences between the ROC curves of AMH and AFC for predicting high (P = 0.835) or poor response (P = 0.567). The cut-off value was a significant source of heterogeneity in the present study. CONCLUSIONS: The present meta-analysis demonstrated that both AMH and AFC have a good predictive ability to the prediction of poor or high responses in IVF treatment. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13048-023-01202-5. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10294345 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-102943452023-06-28 Comparison of anti-Müllerian hormone and antral follicle count in the prediction of ovarian response: a systematic review and meta-analysis Liu, Yang Pan, Zhengmei Wu, Yanzhi Song, Jiamei Chen, Jingsi J Ovarian Res Research BACKGROUND: Increasingly studies reported that the Anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) seems to be a promising and reliable marker of functional ovarian follicle reserve, even better than the AFC test. Our study aimed to conduct a meta-analysis to assess the predictive value of AMH and AFC for predicting poor or high response in IVF treatment. An electronic search was conducted, and the following databases were used: PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library (up to 7 May 2022). The bivariate regression model was used to calculate the pooled sensitivity, specificity, and area under the receiver operator characteristic (ROC) curve. Subgroup analyses and meta-regression also were used in the presented study. Overall performance was assessed by estimating pooled ROC curves between AMH and AFC. RESULTS: Forty-two studies were eligible for this meta-analysis. Comparison of the summary estimates for the prediction of poor or high response showed significant difference in performance for AMH compared with AFC [poor (sensitivity: 0.80 vs 0.74, P < 0.050; specificity: 0.81 vs 0.85, P < 0.001); high (sensitivity: 0.81 vs 0.87, P < 0.001)]. However, there were no significant differences between the ROC curves of AMH and AFC for predicting high (P = 0.835) or poor response (P = 0.567). The cut-off value was a significant source of heterogeneity in the present study. CONCLUSIONS: The present meta-analysis demonstrated that both AMH and AFC have a good predictive ability to the prediction of poor or high responses in IVF treatment. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s13048-023-01202-5. BioMed Central 2023-06-27 /pmc/articles/PMC10294345/ /pubmed/37370145 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13048-023-01202-5 Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) ) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data. |
spellingShingle | Research Liu, Yang Pan, Zhengmei Wu, Yanzhi Song, Jiamei Chen, Jingsi Comparison of anti-Müllerian hormone and antral follicle count in the prediction of ovarian response: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title | Comparison of anti-Müllerian hormone and antral follicle count in the prediction of ovarian response: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full | Comparison of anti-Müllerian hormone and antral follicle count in the prediction of ovarian response: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_fullStr | Comparison of anti-Müllerian hormone and antral follicle count in the prediction of ovarian response: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_full_unstemmed | Comparison of anti-Müllerian hormone and antral follicle count in the prediction of ovarian response: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_short | Comparison of anti-Müllerian hormone and antral follicle count in the prediction of ovarian response: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
title_sort | comparison of anti-müllerian hormone and antral follicle count in the prediction of ovarian response: a systematic review and meta-analysis |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10294345/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37370145 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13048-023-01202-5 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT liuyang comparisonofantimullerianhormoneandantralfolliclecountinthepredictionofovarianresponseasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT panzhengmei comparisonofantimullerianhormoneandantralfolliclecountinthepredictionofovarianresponseasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT wuyanzhi comparisonofantimullerianhormoneandantralfolliclecountinthepredictionofovarianresponseasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT songjiamei comparisonofantimullerianhormoneandantralfolliclecountinthepredictionofovarianresponseasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis AT chenjingsi comparisonofantimullerianhormoneandantralfolliclecountinthepredictionofovarianresponseasystematicreviewandmetaanalysis |