4.7 Article

A lower antral follicle count is associated with infertility

Journal

FERTILITY AND STERILITY
Volume 95, Issue 6, Pages 1950-U107

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2011.01.151

Keywords

Antral follicle count; decreased ovarian reserve; DOR; unexplained infertility; subfertile; FSH

Funding

  1. National Institute of Child Health and Human Development/National Institute on Aging [R01HD044876]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Objective: To determine whether infertile women have lower antral follicle counts (AFC) than age-matched normal women. Design: Case-control. Setting: Academic center. Patient(s): A total of 881 infertile women and 771 women from the community. Intervention(s): Antral follicle count and basal hormone measurements. Main Outcome Measure(s): Median AFCs and FSH levels were compared between the two groups within 5-year age strata by using the median test. A subanalysis was performed by identifying women in the control group with a history of attempting conception without success (subfertile group) and with a spontaneous conception in fewer than 12 months resulting in a live birth (fertile group). Age-specific AFC percentiles were calculated and compared within strata determined by age at the time of attempted conception. Result(s): AFCs were significantly lower in infertile women than in control women across age groups up to 40 years of age. Average FSH levels were significantly higher in the younger-age infertile group versus the community. AFC percentiles differ significantly between fertile and subfertile women within the community up to 40 years of age. Conclusion(s): Decreased AFC in infertile women suggests that factors affecting the size of the remaining follicle pool in younger women also affect oocyte quality and the likelihood of conception. (Fertil Steril (R) 2011; 95: 1950-4. (C)2011 by American Society for Reproductive Medicine.)

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available