Search

Presents a study which measured the hamaker constants and dispersion forces interactions of materials of increasing interest and the advent of atomic force microscopy. Integration of the interaction force; Approach in surface formulation; Development of a parametric model for a probe.

Please cite this paper as: La Marca A, Papaleo E, Grisendi V, Argento C, Giulini S, Volpe A. Development of a nomogram based on markers of ovarian reserve for the individualisation of the follicle-stimulating hormone starting dose in in vitro fertilisation cycles. BJOG 2012;119:1171-1179. Objective To elaborate a nomogram based on markers of ovarian reserve for the calculation of the appropriate starting dose of follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH). Design Cohort study of infertile women. Setting In vitro fertilisation (IVF) unit, University Hospital of Modena, Italy. Population Women aged 18-40 years ( n = 346) and undergoing their first IVF cycle. Methods Serum FSH and anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) measurement. Main outcome measures Development of a model for the prediction of ovarian response to FSH. Results A model based on age, AMH and FSH was able to accurately predict the ovarian sensitivity and accounted for 30% of the variability of ovarian response to FSH. An FSH dosage nomogram was constructed and overall it predicts a starting FSH dose <225 IU in 55.1 and 25.9% of women younger and older than 35 years, respectively. Conclusions In the present study we clearly demonstrated that the daily FSH dose may be calculated on the basis of a woman's age and two markers of ovarian reserve, namely AMH and FSH, with the first two vari;s (age and AMH) being the most significant predictors. The nomogram we developed seems easily applicable for clinicians during their daily clinical practice. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Both quantitative and qualitative aspects of the ovarian reserve are inversely related to age, hence the relationship existing between low quantity and low quality may be only indirect and depending on their strong relationship with the third variable, namely women's age. However the possibility exists that they may also be directly related. The objective of this study was to investigate the relationship between ovarian reserve and female reproductive outcome. Eight published studies reporting histological data on the human ovaries have been carefully reviewed. Only studies where the reproductive history of women was reported have been included for the analysis. The non-growing follicle count was plotted versus age and the best fit line through the data was calculated. All patients were assigned as to be above or below the calculated median hence differentiating women with high or low ovarian reserve for their age. A similar number of pregnancies ended in miscarriage in women with low and high ovarian reserve. The number of deliveries per woman in both the groups was not statistically different. The results of the study do not support the hypothesis that quality and quantity of the follicular pool are directly related. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

BACKGROUND In women, anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) levels may represent the ovarian follicular pool and could be a useful marker of ovarian reserve. The clinical application of AMH measurement has been proposed in the prediction of quantitative and qualitative aspects in assisted reproductive technologies (ART). In men AMH is secreted in both the serum and seminal fluid. Its measurement may be useful in clinical evaluation of the infertile male. METHODS The PubMed database was systematically searched for studies published until the end of January 2009, search criteria relevant to AMH, ovarian reserve, ovarian response to gonadotrophin stimulation, spermatogenesis and azoospermia were used. RESULTS AMH seems to be a better marker in predicting ovarian response to controlled ovarian stimulation than age of the patient, FSH, estradiol and inhibin B. A similar performance for AMH and antral follicular count has been reported. In clinical practice, AMH measurement may be useful in the prediction of poor response and cycle cancellation and also of hyper-response and ovarian hyperstimulation syndrome. In the male, the wide overlap of AMH values between controls and infertile men precludes this hormone from being a useful marker of spermatogenesis. CONCLUSIONS As AMH may permit the identification of both the extremes of ovarian stimulation, a possible role for its measurement may be in the individualization of treatment strategies in order to reduce the clinical risk of ART along with optimized treatment burden. It is fundamental to clarify the cost/benefit of its use in ovarian reserve testing. Regarding the role of AMH in the evaluation of infertile men, AMH as single marker of spermatogenesis does not seem to reach a satisfactory clinical utility. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]