Abstract
Purpose
To evaluate the value of elevated day 3 FSH/LH ratio in predicting IVF results in young and older women.
Methods
One hundred seventy-four women with normal day 3 FSH levels undergoing IVF treatment were studied. Patients were divided into two groups according to basal FSH/LH ratio: Group 1(FSH/LH ≥3, n = 43) and Group 2 (FSH/LH <3, n = 131). The effects of FSH/LH ratio on IVF outcomes were compared. Also, the impact of elevated FSH/LH levels on younger (<35 years; n = 113) and older (≥35 years; n = 61) women was evaluated.
Results
Group 1 had significantly lower mean day 3 LH levels (p = 0.001), lower number of oocytes retrieved (p = 0.004) and lower clinical pregnancy rate (p = 0.04). Older women with elevated FSH/LH ratio (n = 23) had significantly lower transferred good grade embryo counts (p = 0.04) and lower pregnancy rate (p = 0.03) versus older women with lower FSH/LH ratio. But in younger women treatment outcomes were similar in both subgroups.
Conclusion
Elevated day 3 FSH/LH ratio is useful in predicting IVF outcome in older women, but does not seem to be an accurate predictor in younger women.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Gougeon A, Echochard R, Thalabard JC. Age-related changes of the population of human ovarian follicles: increase in the disappearance rate of non-growing and early-growing follicles in aging women. Biol Reprod. 1994;50:653–63.
Nikolaou D, Templeton A. Early ovarian ageing: a hypothesis. Detection and clinical relevance. Hum Reprod. 2003;18:1137–9.
Broekmans FJ, Soules MR, Fauser BC. Ovarian aging: mechanisms and clinical consequences. Endoc Rev. 2009;30:465–93.
Sun W, Stegmann BJ, Henne M, Catherino WH, Segars JH. A new approach to ovarian reserve testing. Fertil Steril. 2008;90:2196–202.
Scott R, Hofmann GE. Prognostic assessment of ovarian reserve. Fertil Steril. 1995;63:1–11.
Lee SJ, Lenton EA, Sexton L, Cooke ID. The effect of age on the cyclical patterns of plasma LH, FSH, oestradiol and progesterone in women with regular menstrual cycles. Hum Reprod. 1998;3:851–5.
Lenton EA, Sexton L, Lee S, Cooke ID. Progressive changes in LH and FSH and LH:FSH ratio in women throughout reproductive life. Maturitas. 1998;10:35–43.
Mukherjee T, Copperman AB, Lapinski R, Sandler B, Bustillo M, Grunfeld L. An elevated day three follicle-stimulating hormone:luteinizing hormone ratio (FSH/LH) in the presence of a normal day 3 FSH predicts a poor response to controlled ovarian hyperstimulation. Fertil Steril. 1996;65:588–93.
Barroso G, Oehninger S, Monzo A, Kolm P, Gibbons WE, Muasher S. High FSH:LH ratio and low LH levels in basal cycle day 3: impact on follicular development and IVF outcome. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2001;18:499–505.
Shrim A, Elizur SE, Seidman DS, Rabinovici J, Wiser A, Dor J. Elevated day 3 FSH/LH ratio due to low LH concentrations predicts reduced ovarian response. Reprod Biomed Online. 2006;12:418–22.
Liu KE, Greenblatt EM. Elevated day 3 follicle-stimulating hormone/luteinizing hormone ratio ≥2 is assosiated with higher rates of cancellation in in vitro fertilization-embryo transfer cycles. Fertil Steril. 2008;90:297–301.
Orvieto R, Meltzer S, Rabinson J, Gemer O, Anteby EY, Nahum R. Does day 3 luteinizing-hormone level predict IVF success in patients undergoing controlled ovarian stimulation with GnRH analouges? Fertil Steril. 2008;90:1297–300.
Broekmans FJ, Kwee J, Hendriks DJ, Mol BW, Lambalk CB. A systematic review of tests predicting ovarian reserve and IVF outcome. Hum Reprod Update. 2006;12:685–718.
Abdalla H, Thum MY. An elevated basal FSH reflects a quantitative rather than qualitative decline of ovarian reserve. Hum Reprod. 2004;19:893–8.
Toner JP. Age = egg quality, FSH level = egg quantity. Fertil Steril. 2003;79:482–8.
Taymor ML. The regulation of folicle growth: some clinical implications in reproductive endocrinology. Fertil Steril. 1996;65:235–47.
Pakarainen T, Zhang FP, Nurmi L, Poutanen M, Huhtaniemi I. Knockout of luteinizing hormone receptor abolishes the effects of follicle-stimulating hormone on preovulatory maturation and ovulation of mouse graafian follicles. Mol Endocrinol. 2005;19:2591–602.
Nocci I, Biagiotti R, Maggi M, Ricci F, Cinotti A, Scarselli G. Low day 3 luteinizing hormone values are predictive of reduced response to ovarian stimulation. Hum Reprod. 1998;13:531–4.
Penarrubia J, Fabregues F, Creus M, Manau D, Casamitjana R, Guimera M, et al. LH serum levels during ovarian stimulation as predictors of ovarian response and assisted reproduction outcome in down-regulated women stimulated with recombinant FSH. Hum Reprod. 2003;18:2689–97.
Kolibianakis EM, Kalogeropoulou L, Griesinger G, Papanikolaou EG, Papadimas J, Bontis J, et al. Among patients treated with FSH and GnRH analogues for in vitro fertilization, is the addition of recombinant LH associated with the probability of live birth? a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2007;13:445–52.
Ho JY, Guu HF, Yi YC, Chen MJ, Ho ES. The serum follicle-stimulating hormone-to-luteinizing hormone ratio at the start of stimulation with gonadotropins after pituitary down-regulation is inversely correlated with a mature oocyte yield and can predict “low responders”. Fertil Steril. 2005;83:883–8.
Scott RT Jr, Hofmann GE, Oehninger S, Muasher SJ. Intercycle variability of day 3 follicle-stimulating hormone levels and its effect on stimulation quality in in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 1990;297–302.
Acknowledgments
The authors are very grateful to our clinical and laboratory coworkers of the Department of the Reproductive Endocrinology.
Conflict of interest
We declare that we have no conflict of interest.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Additional information
Capsule An elevated basal FSH/LH ratio in the presence of a normal basal FSH level is associated with poor IVF outcome in older women but not in young women.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Seckin, B., Turkcapar, F. & Ozaksit, G. Elevated day 3 FSH/LH ratio: a marker to predict IVF outcome in young and older women. J Assist Reprod Genet 29, 231–236 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-011-9695-5
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10815-011-9695-5