کد مقاله کد نشریه سال انتشار مقاله انگلیسی نسخه تمام متن
3934088 1253369 2015 4 صفحه PDF دانلود رایگان
عنوان انگلیسی مقاله ISI
Comparison of markers of ovarian reserve between patients with complete müllerian agenesis and age-matched fertile and infertile controls
موضوعات مرتبط
علوم پزشکی و سلامت پزشکی و دندانپزشکی زنان، زایمان و بهداشت زنان
پیش نمایش صفحه اول مقاله
Comparison of markers of ovarian reserve between patients with complete müllerian agenesis and age-matched fertile and infertile controls
چکیده انگلیسی

ObjectiveTo investigate ovarian reserve in complete müllerian agenesis (CMA) patients and to compare the ovarian reserve of CMA patients with that of age-matched fertile and infertile controls.DesignProspective cohort study.SettingUniversity gynecology outpatient clinic.Patient(s)Fifty-eight typical CMA (type A) patients, 8 atypical CMA (type B) patients, 39 fertile patients, and 38 infertile patients were compared for ovarian reserve.Intervention(s)Ovarian reserve was evaluated via antimüllerian hormone (AMH) levels and antral follicle counts (AFCs).Main Outcome Measure(s)Investigation of ovarian reserve in CMA patients and a comparison of the ovarian reserve of the CMA patients with that of age-matched fertile and infertile controls.Result(s)Fifty-eight type A and eight type B CMA patients and 39 fertile and 38 infertile control patients were assessed for ovarian reserve. The mean (±SD) ages of the type A and type B CMA patients and the fertile and infertile groups were 25.8 ± 5.3, 33.3 ± 5.9, 32.6 ± 4.8, and 33.9 ± 3.3 years, respectively. After age standardization of the groups, AMH levels and AFCs were found to be lower in the atypical CMA group. The differences in AMH levels and AFC were found to be highly significant.Conclusion(s)The present study showed that atypical CMA patients had decreased ovarian reserve compared with age-matched fertile and infertile controls.

ناشر
Database: Elsevier - ScienceDirect (ساینس دایرکت)
Journal: Fertility and Sterility - Volume 104, Issue 1, July 2015, Pages 176–179
نویسندگان
, , , , , , ,