Skip to main content
Log in

The influence of AMH on IVF success

  • Gynecologic Endocrinology and Reproductive Medicine
  • Published:
Archives of Gynecology and Obstetrics Aims and scope Submit manuscript



Anti-Müllerian hormone has a regulative function in the activation of folliculogenesis and an influence on atresia rate. It is considered a marker for the ovarian reserve. We know that a relationship exists between AMH levels and oocyte retrieval numbers, antral follicle count, pregnancy rates and birth rates. The role of AMH as an efficient prognostic factor in determining the probability of pregnancy has been largely discussed in the literature. The aim of this study is to determine the role age and AMH levels play in success rates of IVF/ICSI therapies. To date, the sample group we examined was one of the biggest ever included in a single study of the subject.


All patients who underwent an IVF/ICSI treatment with FSH stimulation in the Wiesbaden Kinderwunschzentrum between 2003 and 2010, were no older than 44 years old, and had an evaluation of serum AMH levels before treatment were included in this study. In total, 1287 patients were analysed retrospectively. Statistical analysis was performed with SPSS.


Females’ mean age was 34.89, ranging from 21 to 44 years. The patients underwent between 1 and 11 IVF cycles. Younger women had significantly higher AMH levels (p = 0.001). Patients with higher AMH levels had significantly lower break-off rates (p < 0.0005) and a significantly higher number of oocytes retrieved (p < 0.0005). Higher levels of AMH corresponded to higher pregnancy rates (p = 0.017). AMH levels do not influence pregnancy rates in younger patients (<36 years).


AMH is a useful parameter that should be measured before performing an IVF/ICSI treatment. In younger patients, AMH levels do not predict pregnancy outcomes. In patients older than 36 years, AMH can be used as a prognostic factor. Even when a woman’s AMH levels are too low to be detected, she still an acceptable chance of becoming pregnant.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others


  1. Kelsey TW, Wright P, Nelson SM, Anderson RA, Wallace WH (2011) A validated model of serum anti mullerian hormone from conception to menopause. PLoS One 6(7):e22024. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0022024

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Nelson SM, Messow MC, Wallace AM, Fleming R, McConnachie A (2011) Nomogram for the decline in serum antimullerian hormone: a population study of 9601 infertility patients. Fertil Steril 95:736–741

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Jayaprakasan K et al (2012) Prediction of in vitro fertilization outcome at different antral follicle count thresholds in a prospective cohort of 1012 women. Fertil Steril 98(3):657–663

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. La Marca A, Sighinolfi G, Radi D, Argento C, Baraldi E, Artenisio AC et al (2010) Anti mullerian hormone (AMH) as a predictive marker in assisted reproductive technology (ART). Hum Reprod Update 16(2):113–130

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Tsakos E, Tolikas A, Daniilidis A, Asmakopoulos B (2014) Predictive value of anti-müllerian hormone, follicle-stimulating hormone and antral follicle count on the outcomeof ovarian stimulation in women following GnRH-antagonist protocol for IVF/ET. Arch Gynecol Obstet 290:1249–1253

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Könninger A, Koch L, Edimiris P, Enekwe A, Nagarajah J, Kasimir-Bauer S et al (2014) Anti-Müllerian hormone: an indicator for the severity of polycystic ovarian syndrome. Arch Gynecol Obstet 290:1023–1030

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. La Marca A, Malmusi S, Giulini S, Tamaro LF, Orvieto R, Levratti P et al (2004) Anti-Müllerian hormone plasma levels in spontaneous menstrual cycle and during treatment with FSH to induce ovulation. Hum Reprod 19(12):2738–2741

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Broer SL et al (2009) The role of antimullerian hormone in prediction of outcome after IVF: comparison with the antral follicle count. Fertil Steril 91(3):705–714

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Hazout A, Bouchard P, Seifer DB, Aussage P, Junca AM, Cohen-Bacrie P (2004) Serum antimullerian hormone/mullerian-inhibiting substance appears to be a more discriminatory marker of assisted reproductive technology outcome than follicle-stimulating hormone, inhibin B, or estradiol. Fertil Steril 82:1323–1329

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. La Marca A, Nelson SM, Sighinolfi G, Manno M, Baraldi E, Roli L et al (2011) Anti-Müllerian hormone-based prediction model for a live birth in assisted reproduction. Reprod Biomed Online 22(4):341–349

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Lekamge DN et al (2007) Anti-mullerian hormone as a predictor of IVF outcome. Reprod Biomed Online 14(5):602–610

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Penarrubia J et al (2005) Basal and stimulation day 5 anti-mullerian hormone serumconcentrations as predictors of ovarian response and pregnancy in assisted reproductive technology cycles stimulated with gonadotropin-releasing hormone agonist—gonadotropin treatment. Hum Reprod 20(4):915–922

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Tremellen K, Kolo M (2010) Serum anti-Mullerian hormone is a useful measure of quantitative ovarian reserve but does not predict the chances of live-birth pregnancy. Aust N Z J Obstet Gynaecol 50(6):568–572

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Ebner T et al (2006) Basal level of anti-Mullerian hormone is associated with oocyte quality in stimulated cycles. Hum Reprod 21(8):2022–2026

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Nelson SM, Yates RW, Fleming R (2007) Serum anti-Mullerian hormone and FSH: prediction of live birth and extremes of response in stimulated cycles—implications for individualization of therapy. Hum Reprod 22(9):2414–2421

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Iliodromiti S, Kelsey TW, Wu O, Anderson RA, Nelson SM (2014) The predictive accuracy of anti-Mullerian hormone for live birth after assisted conception: a systematic review and meta-analysis of the literature. Hum Reprod Update 20:560–570

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. van Rooij IA, Bancsi LF, Broekmans FJ, Looman CW, Habbema JD, te Velde ER (2003) Women older than 40 years of age and those with elevated follicle-stimulating hormone levels differ in poor response rate and embryo quality in in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril 79(3):482–488

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hagen CP, Vestergaard S, Juul A et al (2012) Low concentration of circulation antimüllerian hormone is not predicted of reduced fecundability in young healthy women: a prospective cohort study. Fertil Steril 98(6):1602–1608

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Broekmans FJ, Kwee J, Hendriks DJ, Mol BW, Lambalk CB (2006) A systematic review of tests predicting ovarian reserve and IVF outcome. Hum Reprod Update 12(6):685–718

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Sowers M, McConnell D, Gast K, Zheng H, Nan B, McCarthy JD et al (2010) Anti-Müllerian hormone and inhibin B variability during normal menstrual cycles. Fertil Steril 94(4):1482–1486

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Wunder DM et al (2008) Anti-Mullerian hormone and inhibin B as predictors of pregnancy after treatment by in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection. Fertil Steril 90(6):2203–2210

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  22. van Rooij IA et al (2005) Serum antimullerian hormone levels best reflect the reproductive decline with age in normal women with proven fertility: a longitudinal study. Fertil Steril 83(4):979–987

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Nelson SM, Yates RW, Fleming R (2007) Serum anti-Mullerian hormone and FSH: prediction of live birth and extremes of response in stimulated cycles—implications for individualization of therapy. Hum Reprod 22(9):2414–2421

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Brodin T, Hadziosmanovic N, Berglund L, Olovsson M, Holte J (2013) Antimüllerian hormone levels are strongly associated with live-birth rates after assisted reproduction. J Clin Endocrinol Metab 98(3):1107–1114

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Melo M et al (2010) A prospective, randomized, controlled trial comparing three different gonadotropin regimens in oocyte donors: ovarian response, in vitro fertilization outcome, and analysis of cost minimization. Fertil Steril 94(3):958–964

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Lamazou F et al (2012) Cancellation of IVF-ET cycles: poor prognosis, poor responder, or variability of the response to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation? An analysis of 142 cancellations. J Gynecol Obstet Biol Reprod (Paris) 41(1):41–47

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  27. Irez T, Ocal P, Guralp O, Cetin M, Aydogan B, Sahmay S (2011) Different serum anti-Müllerian hormone concentrations are associated with oocyte quality, embryo development parameters and IVF-ICSI outcomes. Arch Gynecol Obstet 284:1295–1301

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Baird DD, Steiner AZ (2012) Anti-müllerian hormone: a potential new tool in epidemiologic studies of female fecundability. Am J Epidemiol 175:245–249

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Steiner AZ, Herring AH, Kesner JS, Meadows JW, Stanczyk FZ, Hoberman S et al (2011) Antimullerian hormone as a predictor of natural fecundability in women aged 30–42 years. Obstet Gynecol 1117:798–804

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  30. Fréour T, Mirallie S, Colombel A, Bach-Ngohou K, Masson D, Barriere P (2006) Anti-mullerian hormone: clinical relevance in assisted reproductive therapy. Ann Endocrinol 67:567–574

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Check JH, Nazari P, Check ML, Choe JK, Liss JT (2002) Prognosis following in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer (IVF-ET) in patients with elevated day 2 or 3 serum follicle stimulating hormone (FSH) is better in younger vs older patients. Clin Exp Obstet Gynecol 29:42–44

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  32. Lin PX, Huang FJ, Kung FT, Chiang HJ, Lin YJ, Lin YC, Lan KC (2014) Evaluation of serum anti-müllerian hormone as a biomarker of early ovarian aging in young women undergoing IVF/ICS cycle. Int J Clin Exp Pathol 7(9):6245–6253

    PubMed Central  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  33. Lee JR, Liu CH, Huang CC, Hsieh KC, Lin PM, Lee MS et al (2009) Impact of female age and male infertility on ovarian reserve markers to predict outcome of assisted reproduction technology cycles. Reprod Biol Endocrinol 7:100

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations


Corresponding author

Correspondence to R. Gomez.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

R. Gomez and M. Schorsch equally contributed to this work.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Gomez, R., Schorsch, M., Hahn, T. et al. The influence of AMH on IVF success. Arch Gynecol Obstet 293, 667–673 (2016).

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: