Home About us Editorial board Search Ahead of print Current issue Archives Submit article Instructions Subscribe Contact Us Login 


 
 Table of Contents  
REVIEW ARTICLE
Year : 2016  |  Volume : 3  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 46-51

Diminished ovarian reserve and premature ovarian failure: A review


1 Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India
2 ART Centre, All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, India

Date of Web Publication14-Oct-2016

Correspondence Address:
Rinchen Zangmo
Flat No. 133, Chandanwari Apartment, Sector 10, Plot 8, Dwarka, New Delhi
India
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None


DOI: 10.4103/2348-2907.192284

Rights and Permissions
  Abstract 

Diminished ovarian reserve (DOR) is defined as reduced capacity of the ovaries to produce oocytes; the oocytes produced are of poorer quality leading to the formation of poor quality embryos. The most severe form of DOR can be represented as premature ovarian failure (POF). There are various reasons leading to DOR, the most important factor being increasing age, others being endometriosis and surgeries on the ovary. POF can be due to chromosomal aberrations or secondary to chemotherapy, radiotherapy, infections, or surgeries involving the ovaries. Patients with DOR may present with infertility and menstrual cycle abnormalities; patients with sudden onset POF may also present with hot flushes and vaginal dryness. There are various tests for finding out ones's ovarian reserve, the most widely used being follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), anti-Mullerian hormone, and antral follicle count. It is important to know a patient's ovarian reserve before recruiting her for in vitro fertilization. Various modalities have been tried to improve the outcome in candidates with DOR undergoing assisted reproductive technology. This includes high-dose FSH treatment, luteinizing hormone supplementation, GnRH antagonist cycle, and use of adjuvant treatments such as estrogen priming, growth hormone, L-arginine, and dehydroepiandrosterone. Patients who are planned for chemotherapy or radiotherapy may undergo oocyte or embryo cryopreservation before the cancer treatment. To conclude, patients with DOR and POF should be provided with good counseling and emotional support.

Keywords: Assisted reproduction, infertility, ovarian reserve, premature ovarian failure


How to cite this article:
Zangmo R, Singh N, Sharma J B. Diminished ovarian reserve and premature ovarian failure: A review. IVF Lite 2016;3:46-51

How to cite this URL:
Zangmo R, Singh N, Sharma J B. Diminished ovarian reserve and premature ovarian failure: A review. IVF Lite [serial online] 2016 [cited 2022 Jan 18];3:46-51. Available from: http://www.ivflite.org/text.asp?2016/3/2/46/192284


  Introduction Top


Ovarian reserve can be defined as the quality and the quantity of the remaining follicle pool in the ovaries. [1] Diminished ovarian reserve (DOR) is defined as reduced capacity of the ovaries to produce oocytes. The oocytes produced by a woman with DOR are usually of poorer quality as compared to those produced by females with good ovarian reserve. The development of DOR generally reflects the process of follicular depletion and decline in oocyte quality. [2],[3],[4]

Detecting this condition before initiating an in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycle is also often helpful in characterizing women at risk of poor performance in assisted reproductive techniques. The most severe form of DOR is represented by premature ovarian failure (POF) in young females. Spontaneous onset POF affects 1% of women under 40 years, 0.1% of patients younger than 30 years, and 0.01% of patients under the age of 20 years. [5],[6] Nowadays, with the increase in success rates of cancer treatment in children and in young women, the incidence of POF is rapidly rising. [7],[8]

Age of the female is the one of the most important factors in determining the quality and quantity of oocytes produced in a stimulated cycle, also an important predictor of pregnancy outcome. As a woman grows older, her ovarian reserve and her ability to conceive decrease both in natural cycle and assisted reproductive techniques cycle. [9]

In many situations, women of the same age are different with response to ovarian stimulation and some of young women under age 35 have a DOR and poor IVF outcome. A useful predictor of ovarian response to ovulation induction is thus needed. [10]

The reduction of ovarian function with aging has been widely defined in terms of progressive reduction of ovarian follicles and diminished capability to generate competent oocytes. [11],[12] Age is considered to be the main cause of reduced ovarian reserve in a woman over 40 years of age, but as it is known, a premature reduction of ovarian reserve can also occur in young age. POF can occur spontaneously which is primary POF, or can be secondary to the consequence of chemotherapy, radiation, or surgery. Primary POF is idiopathic in about 90% of cases.

Possible reasons behind POF can be principally divided into chromosomal and nonchromosomal anomalies. About 50% of women with POF with primary amenorrhoea have associated chromosomal abnormalities, [13] whereas associated chromosomal abnormalities are much less common in women with secondary amenorrhoea.

Causes of POF other than chromosomal abnormalities are iatrogenic causes such as surgery, chemotherapy, and radiations, autoimmune diseases, infective causes such as herpes virus, cytomegalovirus, mumps, and idiopathic. It is estimated that the 2-8% of women with mumps oophoritis develop a commonly transitory ovarian failure. [13] Certain gynecological conditions contributing to infertility per se may also be independently responsible for DOR. Surgeries such as endometriotic cystectomy with the use of electrosurgery and laparoscopic ovarian drilling for polycystic ovarian syndrome may inadvertently damage the normal ovarian tissue and result in DOR. [32],[38]

The relationship between POF and autoimmune disorders is well documented. POF is an associated occurrence in about 25% of cases of hypothyroidism, in 3% of Addison's disease, and in 2.5% of diabetes mellitus. [14] POF it is also associated with autoimmune polyendocrine syndromes types 1 and 2, pernicious anemia, systemic lupus erythematosus, rheumatoid arthritis, and vitiligo. Around 50% of patients with POF have ovarian antibodies, but their clinical relevance is not well defined due to their high prevalence (31%) in women with normal ovarian reserve. [15]

The risk and prevalence of idiopathic POF vary with ethnicity. Caucasian, African-American, and Hispanic women have been observed to be at a significantly augmented risk of developing idiopathic POF compared to Japanese women. [6] Cigarette smoking was observed to be associated with an augmented risk of idiopathic POF, whereas oral contraceptive use was found to reduce the risk of early menopause in a study. [16]


  Diagnosis and evaluation Top


Most of the women with DOR have normal menstruation at the time of diagnosis. Some women may present with failure of restarting normal menses after pregnancy or after stopping oral contraceptives. Some patients are incidentally detected to have DOR during evaluation for infertility.

Primary POF typically presents with secondary amenorrhea or oligomenorrhea in a young woman less than 40 years of age. [17] In the few women who experience primary amenorrhea, there is frequently an underlying chromosomal abnormality. Women with a diagnosis of POF before of 20 years of age are considerably less likely to present with symptoms of flushing and sweats, depressive mood, and vaginal dryness; [18] on the contrary, patients with iatrogenic POF, due to surgery or cancer therapy are frequently symptomatic. The criteria to make a diagnosis of POF are not always standardized. [19] Many clinicians make the diagnosis on the basis of the presence of amenorrhea for 3-6 months, the finding of follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) values above 40 mIU/ml on at least two different occasions, and low estrogen levels. [20]

Further specific investigations to understand the cause are required, once the diagnosis has been established. Karyotyping is done to exclude genetic causes. If genetic abnormalities are identified, implications for future pregnancies should be discussed. Autoantibody screening for antiovarian, antithyroid, and antiadrenal antibodies may be advised.

The assessment of ovarian reserve has an important role in the management of patients with infertility. Clinically, the patient's age and menstrual cycle pattern give a fair idea about the patient's ovarian reserve. The follicular phase of menstrual cycle of an individual shortens with increasing age, resulting in overall shortening of the menstrual cycle length (MCL) due to reduced production of inhibin-B by the depleting follicle numbers, and subsequent premature rise of FSH production. [21],[22] According to a study, an association was found between MCL and the antral follicle count (AFC) during ultrasonographic evaluation. [23] The study also found that the possibility of pregnancy with assisted reproduction was approximately doubled for women with an MCL <34 days compared with women with an MCL <26 days. [23]


  Tests for detecting ovarian reserve Top


Basal FSH is a good predictor of the size of the remaining follicles pool. Elevated basal FSH levels are indicative of DOR, and women with increased basal FSH levels frequently have decreased oocytes retrieved in IVF program. [24] Day 2-3 levels of FSH and luteinizing hormone (LH) are the most widely used test for ovarian screening.[25] Accuracy in predicting poor response is adequate only when high threshold values are used. [26] FSH should be measured various occasions to rule out discontinuous ovarian activity as a cause of increased gonadotropins. [27]

However, only increased FSH is of limited utility as far as assessment of ovarian reserve is concerned for the management of infertility. [28]

AFC is very effective in estimating the response to ovarian stimulation. [29] Ovarian antral follicles are evaluated by transvaginal ultrasound at the beginning of the follicular phase of menstrual cycle between day 2 and day 5 of periods. Follicles measuring 2-10 mm in size in both the ovaries represent the AFC. [30],[31] AFC provides a useful assessment of ovarian reserve to predict ovarian response, estimate risk of cycle cancellation, and optimize protocol selection and also to select suitable candidate for IVF. [32]

Another endocrine marker, inhibin B, has been identified as growth index of small antral follicle cohort. [33] Inhibins are glycoproteins produced by the granulosa and theca cells of the ovary and belong to the superfamily of transforming growth factors-β (TGFs-β). [32] Role of inhibin includes suppression of FSH production from the pituitary. [34],[35],[36] Levels of inhibit B vary with exogeneous GnRH or FSH stimulation and also between menstrual cycles. Levels are lower (<45 pg/ml) in women who are poor responders. Women with reduced ovarian reserve have reduced values of estradiol (E2) up to 50 pg/ml. [37] When measured along with basal FSH, increased day 3 estradiol reflects a poor response to ovarian stimulation. Early elevation of estradiol reflects the advanced follicular development and early selection of dominant follicle. Estradiol should never be used alone as a biomarker for detecting ovarian reserve.

Anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) is another marker of ovarian reserve. It is a peptide growth factor and member of TGF-β family produced by granulosa cells of preantral and small astral follicles. It functions primarily as an autocrine and paracrine regulator of follicular development. Levels of AMH are gonadotropin-independent and exhibit little variation within and between menstrual cycles. AMH inhibits recruitment of follicles from the primordial pool by modifying the FSH sensitivity of these follicles. It is reflective of the non-FSH dependent growth and has been suggested as a single best predictor of poor response to assisted reproductive technology (ART). [38] AMH value between 2 and 6 ng/ml is usually considered normal according to most of the laboratories. Values below 2 ng/ml are indicative of DOR. Provocative tests such as clomiphene citrate challenge test are no longer used as a means of detecting ovarian reserve in an individual.


  Managing a patient with diminished ovarian reserve Top


It is a challenge for infertility experts to manage a patient with DOR. The only method of achieving pregnancy in these patients is by means of assisted reproductive technique although studies have tried ovulation induction after dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) treatment in such patients. Women with DOR usually have less number of oocytes during oocyte retrieval; hence, fewer embryos for transfer and lesser chances of conception when compared with a woman having normal ovarian reserve. These are the women who may need cancellation of IVF cycle midway either due to the absence of follicular development or due to lack of oocytes retrieved. [39],[40],[41],[42]

The protocols that have been tried for treatment of these patients include stimulation with high doses of gonadotropins, natural cycle IVF, and minimal stimulation IVF. Several studies have also suggested a benefit of supplementation with DHEA, growth hormone, and estradiol. Cryopreservation of oocytes has come up as an important measure to preserve fertility in patients at high risk of developing POF who are not planning immediate conception. Women with severely DOR benefit best by donor oocyte program. [43]

Use of daily dose of gonadotropins, even higher than 450 IU failed to significantly improve ovarian response and clinical outcome according to various studies. [44] A study published in the journal of human reproduction showed that use of recombinant FSH (rFSH) over highly purified gonadotropins results in significant improvement in the mean number of mature oocytes, mean peak estradiol concentration, and also a significant improvement in fertilization rates. [45]

Natural cycle IVF is a relatively easy procedure that minimizes physical and emotional stress, the costs of treatment, and laboratory tests. [46] It allows for natural selection of good quality oocytes, an improved embryo quality, [47] and a higher endometrium receptivity. [48] However, the use of natural cycles is associated with some drawbacks mainly due to the frequent spontaneous LH surge, resulting in high cancellation rate (up to 30%), difficulties in programing oocytes retrievals, high incidence of failure to recover oocytes (16.7-71.4%), and low pregnancy rate per embryo transfer (ET) cycle (0-23.5%). [49] Hence, natural cycles should not be used as the treatment of choice in patients with DOR but should be regarded as an option after repeated poor response with classical protocols of stimulation. [50]

The use of microdose flare protocol was evaluated in several retrospective studies, and it was found that this protocol results in a nonsignificant increase in delivery rate as compared to other protocols. Prospective randomized studies on larger scale are required to strengthen the use of this protocol in poor responders. [51]

The use of GnRH antagonists in the mid-late follicular phase during ovarian stimulation prevents the premature LH surge, whereas not causing suppression in the early follicular phase. [52] With this regimen, it is possible to obtain a more natural follicular recruitment without any inhibitory effect which can possibly be induced by the GnRH agonist. Several authors have therefore suggested the use of this protocol suitable for poor responders. No significant improvements in the reproductive outcome were reported according to two prospective studies. [53],[54] Another prospective randomized study compared the antagonist protocol with the flare-up protocol, and it reported better results with the latter protocol. [55] D'Amato et al. retrieved a significantly higher number of oocytes and observed a significantly lower cancellation rate using GnRH antagonists in combination with clomiphene citrate and gonadotropins in a prospective study. [56]

Due to these conflicting results, larger controlled prospective randomized trials on GnRH antagonists are needed to assess whether GnRH antagonist protocol is truly efficacious in poor responders.

Use of recombinant LH (rLH) was also studied, and available evidence does not support the addition of rLH in poor responders treated with rFSH and GnRH antagonists for IVF. [57]

Adjuvant treatments, which have been tried, include estrogen priming, L-arginine, growth hormone, and DHEA supplementation.

In their retrospective study on 155 poor responders, Chang et al. found that estrogen priming through luteal phase and stimulation phase improved ovarian responsiveness, and this may lead to an increase in pregnancy rate in poor responders with failed cycle. [58]

A prospective study showed that oral L-arginine supplementation might improve ovarian response, endometrial receptivity, and pregnancy rate in poor responders. [59]

A systemic review and meta-analysis reviewed 6 randomized controlled trials with a total of 169 patients; wherein, it was found that growth hormone supplementation was associated with increased clinical pregnancy rate and live birth rate in poor responders in ART cycles although analysis with a larger number of patients is required to come to a definite conclusion. [60]

The role of DHEA in improving ovarian reserve and IVF outcomes in poor responders has been evaluated in several centers across the world including India.

A prospective study by Singh et al. found that DHEA improved all markers of ovarian reserve. [61] Another prospective study done in India on the effect of DHEA on oocytes and embryos showed that 4 months of treatment with DHEA resulted in a significant improvement in the number of oocytes retrieved, oocytes fertilized, and Grade-I embryos. The study concluded that DHEA could help improve pregnancy rate in poor responders with a history of previous failed IVF cycles. [62]

Overall, there is insufficient data to support a beneficial role of DHEA as an adjuvant to controlled ovarian stimulation in IVF cycle. Only three controlled studies were eligible for a meta-analysis with 200 IVF cycles in which the researchers found that the number of oocytes retrieved was significantly lower in DHEA group. [63] Thus, well-designed, randomized controlled trials on a larger number of candidates are needed to support the use of DHEA in standard practice for poor responders.


  Conclusion Top


To conclude, it is always wise to predict the patients likely to have a compromised ovarian reserve and provide proper counseling about the available options. A heartwarming emotional support by the treating doctor provides miraculous psychological benefit to the patients.

Financial support and sponsorship

Nil.

Conflicts of interest

There are no conflicts of interest.



 
  References Top

1.
Chuang CC, Chen CD, Chao KH, Chen SU, Ho HN, Yang YS. Age is a better predictor of pregnancy potential than basal follicle-stimulating hormone levels in women undergoing in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 2003;79:63-8.  Back to cited text no. 1
[PUBMED]    
2.
Toner JP, Philput CB, Jones GS, Muasher SJ. Basal follicle-stimulating hormone level is a better predictor of in vitro fertilization performance than age. Fertil Steril 1991;55:784-91.  Back to cited text no. 2
[PUBMED]    
3.
Sherman BM, Korenman SG. Hormonal characteristics of the human menstrual cycle throughout reproductive life. J Clin Invest 1975;55:699-706.  Back to cited text no. 3
[PUBMED]    
4.
Scott RT, Toner JP, Muasher SJ, Oehninger S, Robinson S, Rosenwaks Z. Follicle-stimulating hormone levels on cycle day 3 are predictive of in vitro fertilization outcome. Fertil Steril 1989;51:651-4.  Back to cited text no. 4
[PUBMED]    
5.
Coulam CB, Adamson SC, Annegers JF. Incidence of premature ovarian failure. Obstet Gynecol 1986;67:604-6.  Back to cited text no. 5
[PUBMED]    
6.
Luborsky JL, Meyer P, Sowers MF, Gold EB, Santoro N. Premature menopause in a multi-ethnic population study of the menopause transition. Hum Reprod 2003;18:199-206.  Back to cited text no. 6
[PUBMED]    
7.
Sklar CA, Mertens AC, Mitby P, Whitton J, Stovall M, Kasper C, et al. Premature menopause in survivors of childhood cancer: A report from the childhood cancer survivor study. J Natl Cancer Inst 2006;98:890-6.  Back to cited text no. 7
[PUBMED]    
8.
Panay N, Fenton A. Premature ovarian failure: A growing concern. Climacteric 2008;11:1-3.  Back to cited text no. 8
    
9.
Wood JW. Fecundity and natural fertility in humans. Oxf Rev Reprod Biol 1989;11:61-109.  Back to cited text no. 9
[PUBMED]    
10.
Karimzadeh MA, Ghandi S. Age and basal FSH as a predictor of ART outcome. Iranian J Reprod Med 2009;7:19-22.  Back to cited text no. 10
    
11.
Ottolenghi C, Uda M, Hamatani T, Crisponi L, Garcia JE, Ko M, et al. Aging of oocyte, ovary, and human reproduction. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2004;1034:117-31.  Back to cited text no. 11
[PUBMED]    
12.
Broekmans FJ, Knauff EA, te Velde ER, Macklon NS, Fauser BC. Female reproductive ageing: Current knowledge and future trends. Trends Endocrinol Metab 2007;18:58-65.  Back to cited text no. 12
[PUBMED]    
13.
Morrison JC, Givens JR, Wiser WL, Fish SA. Mumps oophoritis: A cause of premature menopause. Fertil Steril 1975;26:655-9.  Back to cited text no. 13
[PUBMED]    
14.
Rees M, Purdie D. Premature menopause. In: Management of the Menopause: The Handbook. 4 th ed. London, UK: Royal Society of Medicine Press Ltd.; 2006. p. 142-9.  Back to cited text no. 14
    
15.
Novosad JA, Kalantaridou SN, Tong ZB, Nelson LM. Ovarian antibodies as detected by indirect immunofluorescence are unreliable in the diagnosis of autoimmune premature ovarian failure: A controlled evaluation. BMC Womens Health 2003;3:2.  Back to cited text no. 15
[PUBMED]    
16.
Chang SH, Kim CS, Lee KS, Kim H, Yim SV, Lim YJ, et al. Premenopausal factors influencing premature ovarian failure and early menopause. Maturitas 2007;58:19-30.  Back to cited text no. 16
[PUBMED]    
17.
Rebar RW. Premature ovarian failure. Obstet Gynecol 2009;113:1355-63. doi: 10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181a66843.  Back to cited text no. 17
[PUBMED]    
18.
Panay N, Maclaran K, Nicopollous J, Horner E, Domoney C. Findings from the West London Menopause and PMS Centre POF Database. In: Proceedings of the 32 nd British International Congress of Obstetrics and Gynaecology. Belfast, Northern Ireland, UK; 2010. p. 20-3.  Back to cited text no. 18
    
19.
Panay N, Kalu E. Management of premature ovarian failure. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2009;23:129-40.  Back to cited text no. 19
[PUBMED]    
20.
Woad KJ, Watkins WJ, Prendergast D, Shelling AN. The genetic basis of premature ovarian failure. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 2006;46:242-4.  Back to cited text no. 20
[PUBMED]    
21.
Speroff L, Fritz MA. Female infertility. In: Clinical Gynecologic Endocrinology and Infertility. 7 th ed. Philadelphia, PA, USA: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2005. p. 1015-22.  Back to cited text no. 21
    
22.
van Zonneveld P, Scheffer GJ, Broekmans FJ, Blankenstein MA, de Jong FH, Looman CW, et al. Do cycle disturbances explain the age-related decline of female fertility? Cycle characteristics of women aged over 40 years compared with a reference population of young women. Hum Reprod 2003;18:495-501.  Back to cited text no. 22
[PUBMED]    
23.
Brodin T, Bergh T, Berglund L, Hadziosmanovic N, Holte J. Menstrual cycle length is an age-independent marker of female fertility: Results from 6271 treatment cycles of in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 2008;90:1656-61.  Back to cited text no. 23
[PUBMED]    
24.
Padilla SL, Garcia JE. Effect of maternal age and number of in vitro fertilization procedures on pregnancy outcome. Fertil Steril 1989;52:270-3.  Back to cited text no. 24
[PUBMED]    
25.
Loverro G, Nappi L, Mei L, Giacomoantonio L, Carriero C, Tartagni M. Evaluation of functional ovarian reserve in 60 patients. Reprod Biomed Online 2003;7:200-4.  Back to cited text no. 25
[PUBMED]    
26.
de Carvalho BR, Rosa e Silva AC, Rosa e Silva JC, dos Reis RM, Ferriani RA, Silva de Sá MF. Ovarian reserve evaluation: State of the art. J Assist Reprod Genet 2008;25:311-22.  Back to cited text no. 26
    
27.
Shelling AN. Premature ovarian failure. Reproduction 2010;140:633-41.  Back to cited text no. 27
[PUBMED]    
28.
Bancsi LF, Huijs AM, den Ouden CT, Broekmans FJ, Looman CW, Blankenstein MA, et al. Basal follicle-stimulating hormone levels are of limited value in predicting ongoing pregnancy rates after in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 2000;73:552-7.  Back to cited text no. 28
[PUBMED]    
29.
Bancsi LF, Broekmans FJ, Eijkemans MJ, de Jong FH, Habbema JD, te Velde ER. Predictors of poor ovarian response in in vitro fertilization: A prospective study comparing basal markers of ovarian reserve. Fertil Steril 2002;77:328-36.  Back to cited text no. 29
[PUBMED]    
30.
Broekmans FJ, de Ziegler D, Howles CM, Gougeon A, Trew G, Olivennes F. The antral follicle count: Practical recommendations for better standardization. Fertil Steril 2010;94:1044-51.  Back to cited text no. 30
[PUBMED]    
31.
La Marca A, Spada E, Sighinolfi G, Argento C, Tirelli A, Giulini S, et al. Age-specific nomogram for the decline in antral follicle count throughout the reproductive period. Fertil Steril 2011;95:684-8.  Back to cited text no. 31
[PUBMED]    
32.
Styer AK, Toth TL. Antral follicle count in clinical practice: Building the bridge from ovarian reserve to in vitro fertilization outcome. Fertil Steril 2011;95:480-1.  Back to cited text no. 32
[PUBMED]    
33.
Welt CK. Regulation and function of inhibins in the normal menstrual cycle. Semin Reprod Med 2004;22:187-93.  Back to cited text no. 33
[PUBMED]    
34.
Hayes FJ, Hall JE, Boepple PA, Crowley WF Jr. Clinical review 96: Differential control of gonadotropin secretion in the human: endocrine role of inhibin. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 1998;83:1835-41.  Back to cited text no. 34
[PUBMED]    
35.
Pierson TM, Wang Y, DeMayo FJ, Matzuk MM, Tsai SY, Omalley BW. Regulable expression of inhibin A in wild-type and inhibin alpha null mice. Mol Endocrinol 2000;14:1075-85.  Back to cited text no. 35
[PUBMED]    
36.
Welt C, Sidis Y, Keutmann H, Schneyer A. Activins, inhibins, and follistatins: From endocrinology to signaling. A paradigm for the new millennium. Exp Biol Med (Maywood) 2002;227:724-52.  Back to cited text no. 36
[PUBMED]    
37.
Rebar RW. Premature ovarian failure. Obstet Gynecol 2009;113:1355-63.  Back to cited text no. 37
[PUBMED]    
38.
Muttukrishna S, McGarrigle H, Wakim R, Khadum I, Ranieri DM, Serhal P. Antral follicle count, anti-Mullerian hormone and inhibin B: Predictors of ovarian response in assisted reproductive technology? BJOG 2005;112:1384-90.  Back to cited text no. 38
[PUBMED]    
39.
Loutradis D, Vomvolaki E, Drakakis P. Poor responder protocols for in-vitro fertilization: Options and results. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol 2008;20:374-8.  Back to cited text no. 39
[PUBMED]    
40.
Kyrou D, Kolibianakis EM, Venetis CA, Papanikolaou EG, Bontis J, Tarlatzis BC. How to improve the probability of pregnancy in poor responders undergoing in vitro fertilization: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Fertil Steril 2009;91:749-66.  Back to cited text no. 40
[PUBMED]    
41.
Pandian Z, McTavish AR, Aucott L, Hamilton MP, Bhattacharya S. Interventions for 'poor responders' to controlled ovarian hyper stimulation (COH) in in-vitro fertilisation (IVF). Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2010;1:CD004379.  Back to cited text no. 41
[PUBMED]    
42.
Ferraretti AP, La Marca A, Fauser BC, Tarlatzis B, Nargund G, Gianaroli L; ESHRE Working Group on Poor Ovarian Response Definition. ESHRE consensus on the definition of 'poor response' to ovarian stimulation for in vitro fertilization: The Bologna criteria. Hum Reprod 2011;26:1616-24.  Back to cited text no. 42
[PUBMED]    
43.
Maclaran K, Panay N. Premature ovarian failure. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care 2011;37:35-42.  Back to cited text no. 43
[PUBMED]    
44.
Land JA, Yarmolinskaya MI, Dumoulin JC, Evers JL. High-dose human menopausal gonadotropin stimulation in poor responders does not improve in vitro fertilization outcome. Fertil Steril 1996;65:961-5.  Back to cited text no. 44
[PUBMED]    
45.
De Placido G, Alviggi C, Mollo A, Strina I, Varricchio MT, Molis M. Recombinant follicle stimulating hormone is effective in poor responders to highly purified follicle stimulating hormone. Hum Reprod 2000;15:17-20.  Back to cited text no. 45
[PUBMED]    
46.
Janssens RM, Lambalk CB, Vermeiden JP, Schats R, Schoemaker J. In-vitro fertilization in a spontaneous cycle: Easy, cheap and realistic. Hum Reprod 2000;15:314-8.  Back to cited text no. 46
[PUBMED]    
47.
Munne S, Magli C, Adler A, Wright G, de Boer K, Mortimer D, et al. Treatment-related chromosome abnormalities in human embryos. Hum Reprod 1997;12:780-4.  Back to cited text no. 47
[PUBMED]    
48.
Lass A, Peat D, Avery S, Brinsden P. Histological evaluation of endometrium on the day of oocyte retrieval after gonadotrophin-releasing hormone agonist-follicle stimulating hormone ovulation induction for in-vitro fertilization. Hum Reprod 1998;13:3203-5.  Back to cited text no. 48
[PUBMED]    
49.
Ata B, Yakin K, Balaban B, Urman B. Embryo implantation rates in natural and stimulated assisted reproduction treatment cycles in poor responders. Reprod Biomed Online 2008;17:207-12.  Back to cited text no. 49
[PUBMED]    
50.
Li J, Xu Y, Zhou G, Guo J, Xin N. Natural cycle IVF/IVM may be more desirable for poor responder patients after failure of stimulated cycles. J Assist Reprod Genet 2011;28:791-5.  Back to cited text no. 50
[PUBMED]    
51.
Gardner DK. Treatment strategies in assisted reproduction for the low responder patient. Textbook of Assisted Reproductive Technologies. 3 rd ed. UK: Informa Health Care; 2009. p. 585-6.  Back to cited text no. 51
    
52.
Kenigsberg D, Littman BA, Williams RF, Hodgen GD. Medical hypophysectomy: II. Variability of ovarian response to gonadotropin therapy. Fertil Steril 1984;42:116-26.  Back to cited text no. 52
[PUBMED]    
53.
Craft I, Gorgy A, Hill J, Menon D, Podsiadly B. Will GnRH antagonists provide new hope for patients considered 'difficult responders' to GnRH agonist protocols? Hum Reprod 1999;14:2959-62.  Back to cited text no. 53
[PUBMED]    
54.
Akman MA, Erden HF, Tosun SB, Bayazit N, Aksoy E, Bahceci M. Addition of GnRH antagonist in cycles of poor responders undergoing IVF. Hum Reprod 2000;15:2145-7.  Back to cited text no. 54
[PUBMED]    
55.
Akman MA, Erden HF, Tosun SB, Bayazit N, Aksoy E, Bahceci M. Comparison of agonistic flare-up-protocol and antagonistic multiple dose protocol in ovarian stimulation of poor responders: Results of a prospective randomized trial. Hum Reprod 2001;16:868-70.  Back to cited text no. 55
[PUBMED]    
56.
D'Amato G, Caroppo E, Pasquadibisceglie A, Carone D, Vitti A, Vizziello GM. A novel protocol of ovulation induction with delayed gonadotropin-releasing hormone antagonist administration combined with high-dose recombinant follicle-stimulating hormone and clomiphene citrate for poor responders and women over 35 years. Fertil Steril 2004;81:1572-7.  Back to cited text no. 56
[PUBMED]    
57.
Fan W, Li S, Chen Q, Huang Z, Ma Q, Wang Y. Recombinant luteinizing hormone supplementation in poor responders undergoing IVF: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Gynecol Endocrinol 2013;29:278-84.  Back to cited text no. 57
[PUBMED]    
58.
Chang EM, Han JE, Won HJ, Kim YS, Yoon TK, Lee WS. Effect of estrogen priming through luteal phase and stimulation phase in poor responders in in-vitro fertilization. J Assist Reprod Genet 2012;29:225-30.  Back to cited text no. 58
    
59.
Battaglia C, Salvatori M, Maxia N, Petraglia F, Facchinetti F, Volpe A. Adjuvant L-arginine treatment for in-vitro fertilization in poor responder patients. Hum Reprod 1999;14:1690-7.  Back to cited text no. 59
[PUBMED]    
60.
Kolibianakis EM, Venetis CA, Diedrich K, Tarlatzis BC, Griesinger G. Addition of growth hormone to gonadotrophins in ovarian stimulation of poor responders treated by in-vitro fertilization: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update 2009;15:613-22.  Back to cited text no. 60
[PUBMED]    
61.
Singh N, Zangmo R, Kumar S, Roy KK, Sharma JB, Malhotra N, et al. A prospective study on role of dehydroepiandrosterone (DHEA) on improving the ovarian reserve markers in infertile patients with poor ovarian reserve. Gynecol Endocrinol 2013;29:989-92.  Back to cited text no. 61
[PUBMED]    
62.
Zangmo R, Singh N, Kumar S, Vanamail P, Tiwari A. Role of dehydroepiandrosterone in improving oocyte and embryo quality in IVF cycles. Reprod Biomed Online 2014;28:743-7.  Back to cited text no. 62
[PUBMED]    
63.
Narkwichean A, Maalouf W, Campbell BK, Jayaprakasan K. Efficacy of dehydroepiandrosterone to improve ovarian response in women with diminished ovarian reserve: A meta-analysis. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 2013;11:44.  Back to cited text no. 63
[PUBMED]    

 
  Authors Top


Dr. Rinchen Zangmo has done her MBBS from Government Medical College, Srinagar, She obtained the degree of M.D. Obstetrics and Gynecology from All India Institute of Medical Sciences, New Delhi, in the year June 2013. She is also a Diplomate of National Board (DNB) in Obstetrics and Gynecology.



This article has been cited by
1 Application of Stem Cell Therapy for Infertility
Sarama Saha,Partha Roy,Cynthia Corbitt,Sham S. Kakar
Cells. 2021; 10(7): 1613
[Pubmed] | [DOI]
2 Analysis of IVF/ICSI-FET Outcomes in Women With Advanced Endometriosis: Influence on Ovarian Response and Oocyte Competence
Anji Li,Jie Zhang,Yanping Kuang,Chaoqin Yu
Frontiers in Endocrinology. 2020; 11
[Pubmed] | [DOI]



 

Top
 
 
  Search
 
Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
Access Statistics
Email Alert *
Add to My List *
* Registration required (free)

 
  In this article
Abstract
Introduction
Diagnosis and ev...
Tests for detect...
Managing a patie...
Conclusion
References
Authors

 Article Access Statistics
    Viewed7023    
    Printed179    
    Emailed0    
    PDF Downloaded441    
    Comments [Add]    
    Cited by others 2    

Recommend this journal


[TAG2]
[TAG3]
[TAG4]