4.4 Review

Fertility in women of late reproductive age: the role of serum anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) levels in its assessment

期刊

JOURNAL OF ENDOCRINOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION
卷 39, 期 11, 页码 1259-1265

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s40618-016-0497-6

关键词

Fertility; Late reproductive age; Anti-Mullerianhormone; Pregnancy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Fertility is referred to the capability for having offspring and can be evaluated by fertility rate. Women's fertility is strictly dependent on individual's age. The fertility peak occurs in the early 20s, and it starts to decline in the third and fourth decades of life (falling sharply after age 35). The aim of this work is to review the available data concerning fertility in women of late reproductive age, especially the role of serum anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) levels. There are a lot of factors responsible for decrease of fertility in women of late reproductive age. These factors can be classified as oocyte-dependent (decrease in oocyte quantity and quality) and oocyte-independent (reproductive organs [uterus, oviducts] status and general health). Anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) is a dimeric glycoprotein of the transforming growth factor-beta (TGF-beta) superfamily produced directly by the ovarian granulosa cells of secondary, preantral, and early antral follicles. It has been used as an ovarian reserve marker since 2002. Anti-Mullerian hormone seems to be the best endocrine marker for assessing the age-related decline of the ovarian pool in healthy women. Evaluation of AMH's predictive value in the naturally aging population is important for counseling women about reproductive planning as well as for treatment planning for women experiencing hormone-sensitive gynecological conditions such as endometriosis and fibroids. AMH can be considered as an indicator of fertility in late reproductive age women and pregnancy outcome in assisted reproductive technology cycles. AMH can strongly predict poor response in the controlled ovarian stimulation.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据