Iwase A, Asada Y, Sugishita Y, Osuka S, Kitajima M, Kawamura K. Anti-Müllerian hormone for screening, diagnosis, evaluation, and prediction: A systematic review and expert opinions.
J Obstet Gynaecol Res 2024;
50:15-39. [PMID:
37964401 DOI:
10.1111/jog.15818]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [What about the content of this article? (0)] [Affiliation(s)] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/13/2023] [Accepted: 10/12/2023] [Indexed: 11/16/2023]
Abstract
AIM
To present evidence-based recommendations for anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) measurement as an ovarian reserve test.
METHODS
A systematic literature search for the clinical utility of AMH was conducted in PubMed from its inception to August 2022 to identify studies, including meta-analyses, reviews, randomized controlled trials, and clinical trials, followed by an additional systematic search using keywords. Based on this evidence, an expert panel developed clinical questions (CQs).
RESULTS
A total of 1895 studies were identified and 95 articles were included to establish expert opinions subdivided into general population, infertility treatment, primary ovarian insufficiency, polycystic ovary syndrome, surgery, and oncofertility. We developed 13 CQs and 1 future research question with levels of evidence and recommendations.
CONCLUSION
The findings of the current systematic review covered the clinical utility of AMH including its screening, diagnosis, evaluation, and prediction. Although some clinical implications of AMH remain debatable, these expert opinions may help promote a better understanding of AMH and establish its clinical significance.
Collapse