Ovarian reserve analysis in subfertile women based on physical, ultrasound and hormonal parameters.

Purpose: Despite the availability of several markers for the evaluation of ovarian reserve, the correlation between the markers has not been reported clearly in the existing studies. Therefore, this study investigated the level of subfertility by comparing the physical parameters such as age and BMI in the subfertile women. In addition, the study compared the ultrasound and hormonal parameters with the physical parameters in subfertile women.Methods: A total of 200 subfertile patients presented to outpatient department were considered in this study. The selected candidate was 29 to 39 years old and was investigated after two years of unprotected sexual intercourse. A consecutive enumerative sampling method has been employed for data collection. The collected data are processed to determine correlation and regression coefficients using Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 20.0.Results: The results revealed that follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) level and anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) values varied among the above 30 age group of respondents with BMI values 25-30. There is no relationship between the respondents' right and left ovarian volume by comparing age within BMI.Conclusion: In conclusion, there is a strong relationship between the FSH level, AMH and physical parameters age and BMI. The reproductive age of women will be older than or younger than the actual age of the women. The reproductive age will be calculated with the ovarian volume, ovarian reserve, ovary size and time to menopause.

[1]  D. Cha,et al.  The anti-Mullerian hormone as a predictor of early pregnancy loss in subfertile women , 2020, Systems biology in reproductive medicine.

[2]  B. Mol,et al.  Cost-effectiveness of medically assisted reproduction or expectant management for unexplained subfertility: when to start treatment? , 2020, Human reproduction.

[3]  D. Lawlor,et al.  Association of the functional ovarian reserve with serum metabolomic profiling by nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy: a cross-sectional study of ~ 400 women , 2020, BMC Medicine.

[4]  J. Visser,et al.  Anti-Müllerian Hormone and Ovarian Reserve: Update on Assessing Ovarian Function , 2020, The Journal of clinical endocrinology and metabolism.

[5]  A. Pouliakis,et al.  Special characteristics, reproductive, and clinical profile of women with unexplained infertility versus other causes of infertility: a comparative study , 2020, Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics.

[6]  C. Benedetto,et al.  The Ovarian Sensitivity Index (OSI) Significantly Correlates with Ovarian Reserve Biomarkers, Is More Predictive of Clinical Pregnancy than the Total Number of Oocytes, and Is Consistent in Consecutive IVF Cycles , 2020, Journal of clinical medicine.

[7]  Xiaoping Liu,et al.  Mild stimulation protocol vs conventional controlled ovarian stimulation protocol in poor ovarian response patients: a prospective randomized controlled trial , 2020, Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics.

[8]  J. Stanford,et al.  Menstrual bleeding, cycle length, and follicular and luteal phase lengths in women without known subfertility: A pooled analysis of three cohorts. , 2020, Paediatric and perinatal epidemiology.

[9]  Lianwen Zheng,et al.  Polycystic ovary syndrome and mitochondrial dysfunction , 2019, Reproductive Biology and Endocrinology.

[10]  F. Zahra,et al.  Ovarian reserve parameters and response to controlled ovarian stimulation in infertile patients , 2019, Pakistan journal of medical sciences.

[11]  I. Izhaki,et al.  Do young women with unexplained infertility show manifestations of decreased ovarian reserve? , 2019, Journal of Assisted Reproduction and Genetics.

[12]  A. Albu,et al.  The relationship between anti-Müllerian hormone serum level and body mass index in a large cohort of infertile patients , 2018, Endocrine.

[13]  K. Shrestha,et al.  Knowledge regarding subfertility among reproductive age women in selected VDC of Baglung District , 2018, Journal of Chitwan Medical College.

[14]  M. Luo,et al.  Ovarian aging: an ongoing prospective community-based cohort study in middle-aged Chinese women , 2018, Climacteric : the journal of the International Menopause Society.

[15]  P. Christos,et al.  The relationship between body mass index and anti-mullerian hormone levels in reproductive-age women; is there a negative correlation? , 2018 .

[16]  D. Baird,et al.  Association Between Biomarkers of Ovarian Reserve and Infertility Among Older Women of Reproductive Age , 2017, JAMA.

[17]  Chinmoy Ghosh,et al.  Biochemical Parameters Serving As Prognostic Indicators of Ovarian Reserve in Females with Unexplained Sub-Fertility , 2017 .

[18]  J. Qiao,et al.  Retrospective cohort study: AMH is the best ovarian reserve markers in predicting ovarian response but has unfavorable value in predicting clinical pregnancy in GnRH antagonist protocol , 2017, Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics.

[19]  C. Gnoth,et al.  Natural conception rates in subfertile couples following fertility awareness training , 2017, Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics.

[20]  M. Aboulghar,et al.  The value of different ovarian reserve tests in the prediction of ovarian response in patients with unexplained infertility , 2016 .

[21]  Alison Taylor.  Extent of the problem , 2003, BMJ : British Medical Journal.

[22]  H. A. Al-janabi,et al.  Thyroid Status in Iraqi Subfertile Women: A Case Control Study , 2019, Indian Journal of Public Health Research & Development.

[23]  M. Zafar.  Association of body mass index (BMI) and sub-fertility among young women in Karachi, Pakistan , 2019, Fertility Science and Research.