ArticleJournal of assisted reproduction and genetics2026
Fertility preservation in women with diminished ovarian reserve: evaluating the AMH criteria.
Article in Journal of assisted reproduction and genetics, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeDoes fertility preservation (FP) through oocyte cryopreservation provide realistic reproductive opportunities for diminished ovarian reserve (DOR)? Literature suggests cumulative live birth rates of 30-45% with 8-10 oocytes under 35 years old. Insufficient data exist to define whether DOR patients should be offered FP systematically.
methodsThis retrospective single-center study analyzed data from 304 women undergoing oocyte cryopreservation (January 2016-December 2024). Patients were stratified into cohort 1 (Anti-Müllerian hormone-AMH-≤ 0.5 ng/mL, n = 49) and cohort 2 (AMH > 0.5 ng/mL, n = 255). Primary outcomes included retrieved oocytes (RO) and vitrified oocytes (VO). Secondary outcome examined DuoStim results. Statistical analysis included correlation assessments, ANCOVA, and multiple linear regression.
resultsDOR patients achieved lower oocyte yields compared to cohort 2 (RO: 3.1 ± 2.3 vs. 9.0 ± 6.5; VO: 2.3 ± 1.9 vs. 7.4 ± 5.1; p < 0.001), despite higher gonadotropin doses. AMH strongly correlated with RO (ρ = 0.636, p < 0.001) and VO (ρ = 0.624, p < 0.001). Linear regression confirmed AMH (B = 1.151, p < 0.001) and age (B = - 0.139, p = 0.002) as significant predictors of VO. In DuoStim subgroup, DOR patients achieved 3.3 ± 2.1 total VO compared to 6.9 ± 3.3 in cohort 2 (p = 0.001).
conclusionDOR patients achieve oocyte yields substantially below thresholds associated with reasonable live birth rates, raising concerns regarding FP efficacy. These findings highlight the need for personalized counseling that considers individual patient characteristics and provides evidence-based, realistic expectations for FP. A revision of current AMH thresholds may improve patient selection and cost-effectiveness of FP programs. Younger DOR patients may benefit from oocyte cryopreservation for FP, emphasizing the importance of age stratification.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.