We use cookies to distinguish you from other users and to provide you with a better experience on our websites. Close this message to accept cookies or find out how to manage your cookie settings.
To save content items to your account,
please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies.
If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account.
Find out more about saving content to .
To save content items to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org
is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings
on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part
of your Kindle email address below.
Find out more about saving to your Kindle.
Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations.
‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi.
‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.
Treatment with progesterone has been found to improve pregnancy rates in menstruating women with luteal phase defect. Vaginal route of progesterone supplementation has gained wide application mainly due to patient comfort and effectiveness. The use of human chorionic gonadotropin (hCG) may rescue the function of the failing corpus luteum in in vitro fertilization (IVF) cycles. In a prospective randomized study that compared the efficacy of luteal phase support (LPS) using either hCG, hCG in combination with daily vaginal progesterone or vaginal progesterone only, there were no statistically significant differences in the clinical ongoing pregnancy rate between the three groups. A recent trial evaluating the addition of oestrogen (E2) to vaginal progesterone in gonadotropin releasing hormone (GnRH) antagonist cycles showed that the endocrine profile was similar in the group that received progesterone and E2 or progesterone alone.
This chapter discusses the methods currently used for the assessment of ovarian reserve and the prediction of ovarian response to stimulation. It highlights that even when using very low follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) levels the accuracy in the prediction of ovarian reserve is only modest, making it inferior to other markers currently used. Antral follicle count (AFC) was found to correlate with, but was superior to, biochemical markers such as basal estradiol (E2), inhibin B, and FSH in predicting ovarian responsiveness. The combination of markers has been proposed for a better estimate of functional gonadal capacity. Ovarian reserve tests have only modest predictive value, especially in the prediction of occurrence of pregnancy and live birth. More studies are needed to evaluate the use of anti-Mullerian hormone (AMH) in conjunction with AFC in the prediction of ovarian reserve and ovarian response.
Recommend this
Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this to your organisation's collection.