<?xml version="1.0" encoding="ISO-8859-1"?><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance">
<front>
<journal-meta>
<journal-id>0300-9041</journal-id>
<journal-title><![CDATA[Ginecología y obstetricia de México]]></journal-title>
<abbrev-journal-title><![CDATA[Ginecol. obstet. Méx.]]></abbrev-journal-title>
<issn>0300-9041</issn>
<publisher>
<publisher-name><![CDATA[Federación Mexicana de Colegios de Obstetricia y Ginecología A.C.]]></publisher-name>
</publisher>
</journal-meta>
<article-meta>
<article-id>S0300-90412019000600347</article-id>
<article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.24245/gom.v87i6.2564</article-id>
<title-group>
<article-title xml:lang="es"><![CDATA[¿Cuál es el punto de corte más significativo de hormona antimülleriana como predictor de la respuesta ovárica, tasa de embarazo y nacido vivo?]]></article-title>
<article-title xml:lang="en"><![CDATA[What is the most significant cutting point of antimüllerian hormone as a predictor of the ovarian response, pregnancy rate and living born?]]></article-title>
</title-group>
<contrib-group>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Guajardo-Flores]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Juan Pablo]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="Aff"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Salazar-López Ortiz]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Carlos]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="Aff"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Castro-López]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[José Luis]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="Aff"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Téllez-Velasco]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Sergio]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="Aff"/>
</contrib>
<contrib contrib-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Bahena-Espinoza]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Natyeli]]></given-names>
</name>
<xref ref-type="aff" rid="Aff"/>
</contrib>
</contrib-group>
<aff id="Af1">
<institution><![CDATA[,Hospital Español de México  ]]></institution>
<addr-line><![CDATA[Ciudad de México ]]></addr-line>
<country>Mexico</country>
</aff>
<aff id="Af2">
<institution><![CDATA[,Hospital Español de México  ]]></institution>
<addr-line><![CDATA[Ciudad de México ]]></addr-line>
<country>Mexico</country>
</aff>
<aff id="Af3">
<institution><![CDATA[,Hospital Español de México  ]]></institution>
<addr-line><![CDATA[Ciudad de México ]]></addr-line>
<country>Mexico</country>
</aff>
<aff id="Af4">
<institution><![CDATA[,Hospital Español de México  ]]></institution>
<addr-line><![CDATA[Ciudad de México ]]></addr-line>
<country>Mexico</country>
</aff>
<pub-date pub-type="pub">
<day>00</day>
<month>00</month>
<year>2019</year>
</pub-date>
<pub-date pub-type="epub">
<day>00</day>
<month>00</month>
<year>2019</year>
</pub-date>
<volume>87</volume>
<numero>6</numero>
<fpage>347</fpage>
<lpage>355</lpage>
<copyright-statement/>
<copyright-year/>
<self-uri xlink:href="http://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&amp;pid=S0300-90412019000600347&amp;lng=en&amp;nrm=iso"></self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="http://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_abstract&amp;pid=S0300-90412019000600347&amp;lng=en&amp;nrm=iso"></self-uri><self-uri xlink:href="http://www.scielo.org.mx/scielo.php?script=sci_pdf&amp;pid=S0300-90412019000600347&amp;lng=en&amp;nrm=iso"></self-uri><abstract abstract-type="short" xml:lang="es"><p><![CDATA[Resumen  OBJETIVO: Evaluar la eficacia de la hormona antimülleriana en la predicción de la respuesta ovárica, tasa de embarazo y nacido vivo.  MATERIALES Y MÉTODOS:  Estudio retrospectivo, analítico y observacional efectuado para evaluar los ciclos de estimulación ovárica de pacientes atendidas entre el 1 de enero de 2010 y el 30 de junio de 2017 en el Centro de Reproducción Hisparep. Criterios de inclusión: límites de edad 20 y 44 años y tener ciclos menstruales regulares. Criterios de exclusión: factor masculino alterado, cavidad uterina alterada, trastornos endocrinos, antecedente de daño ovárico. Variables de estudio: concentraciones de hormona antimülleriana, ovocitos recuperados, maduros, fecundados, embriones, tasa de embarazo y nacido vivo. Las variables cuantitativas se analizaron mediante una comparación de medias con t de Student, las variables porcentuales mediante comparación de percentiles.  RESULTADOS:  Se evaluaron 223 ciclos, divididos en grupos según diferentes puntos de corte. En cualquier punto de corte la hormona antimülleriana predice mayor recuperación de ovocitos maduros y fecundados: 1.25 ng/mL fue el punto de corte más significativo porque predijo mayor obtención de embriones. Se observó relación entre las tasas de embarazo clínico y nacido vivo, aunque su poder predictivo fue débil. Tomar como referencia un punto de corte de 0.5 ng/mL parece predecir bajas probabilidades de nacido vivo.  CONCLUSIONES: La hormona antimülleriana fue el mejor marcador de respuesta ovárica; el punto de corte más significativo fue el de 1.25 ng/mL. Hacen falta más estudios para evaluar su eficacia como predictor de bajas tasas de nacido vivo.]]></p></abstract>
<abstract abstract-type="short" xml:lang="en"><p><![CDATA[Abstract  OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of antimülleriana hormone in prediction of the ovarian response, pregnancy rate and live birth.  MATERIALS AND METHODS:  In this retrospective, analytical and observational study, ovarian stimulation cycles were evaluated at the Hisparep Reproduction Center, in a period from January 1, 2010 to June 30, 2017, the inclusion criteria were; Age from 20 to 44 years and regular menstrual cycles. The exclusion criteria; altered male factor, altered uterine cavity, endocrine disorders, antecedent of ovarian damage. The study variables; antimüllerian hormone, oocytes recovered, mature, fertilized, embryos, pregnancy rate and live birth. The quantitative variables were analyzed by means of a comparison of means, using the Student&amp;apos;s T test, the percentage variables by means of comparison of percentiles.  RESULTS:  223 cycles were evaluated, divided into groups using different cut points. It was determined that Antimullerian Hormone predicts a greater recovery of mature and fertilized oocytes using any cut point, we consider that 1.25 ng / mL was the most significant cutoff point, since it predicts higher embryo obtaining, relationship was observed in pregnancy rates clinical and live birth, although its predictive power is weak, however, using a cutoff of 0.5 ng / mL seems to predict low odds of live birth  CONCLUSIONS:  Antimullerian hormone is the best marker of ovarian response, we consider that 1.25 ng /mL is the most significant cut-off point, more studies are needed to evaluate its efficacy as a predictor of low rates of live birth.]]></p></abstract>
<kwd-group>
<kwd lng="es"><![CDATA[Tasa de embarazo]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="es"><![CDATA[ciclos de estimulación ovárica]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="es"><![CDATA[oocitos]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="es"><![CDATA[antimülleriana]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="es"><![CDATA[inducción de la ovulación]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="es"><![CDATA[ciclo menstrual]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="es"><![CDATA[nacido vivo]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[Pregnancy rate]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[Ovarian stimulation cycles]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[oocytes]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[Anti-Mullerian]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[Ovulation induction]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[Menstrual cycle]]></kwd>
<kwd lng="en"><![CDATA[Live birth]]></kwd>
</kwd-group>
</article-meta>
</front><back>
<ref-list>
<ref id="B1">
<label>1</label><nlm-citation citation-type="">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Boivin]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[J.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<source><![CDATA[Associations between maternal older age, family environment and parent and child wellbeing in families using assisted reproductive techniques to conceive]]></source>
<year>2009</year>
</nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B2">
<label>2</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Fleming]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[R]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Assessing ovarian response: antral follicle count versus anti-Müllerian hormone]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Reprod Biomed Online]]></source>
<year>2015</year>
<volume>31</volume>
<numero>4</numero>
<issue>4</issue>
<page-range>486-96</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B3">
<label>3</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Park]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[Hyun Jong]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Anti-Müllerian hormone levels as a predictor of clinical pregnancy in in vitro fertilization/intracytoplasmic sperm injection-embryo transfer cycles in patients over 40 years of age]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Clin Exp Reprod Med.]]></source>
<year>2015</year>
<volume>42</volume>
<numero>4</numero>
<issue>4</issue>
<page-range>143-8</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B4">
<label>4</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Park]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[HJ]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[The meaning of anti-Müllerian hormone levels in patients at a high risk of poor ovarian response]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Clin Exp Reprod Med]]></source>
<year>2016</year>
<volume>43</volume>
<numero>3</numero>
<issue>3</issue>
<page-range>139-45</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B5">
<label>5</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Esposito MA]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[A moderately elevated day 3 FSH concentration has limited predictive value, especially in younger women]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Hum Reprod]]></source>
<year>2002</year>
<volume>17</volume>
<numero>1</numero>
<issue>1</issue>
<page-range>118-23</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B6">
<label>6</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Tsakos]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[E]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Predictive value of anti-mullerian hormone, follicle-stimulating hormone and antral follicle count on the outcome of ovarian stimulation in women following GnRH-antagonist protocol for IVF/ET]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Arch Gynecol Obstet]]></source>
<year>2014</year>
<volume>290</volume>
<numero>6</numero>
<issue>6</issue>
<page-range>1249-53</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B7">
<label>7</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Jayaprakasan]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[K.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Prediction of in vitro fertilization outcome at different antral follicle count thresholds in a prospective cohort of 1,012 women]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Fertility and Sterility]]></source>
<year>2012</year>
<volume>98</volume>
<numero>3</numero>
<issue>3</issue>
<page-range>657-63</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B8">
<label>8</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Weenen]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[C]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Anti-Mullerian hormone expression pattern in the human ovary: potential implications for initial and cyclic follicle recruitment]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[MHR]]></source>
<year>2004</year>
<volume>10</volume>
<numero>2</numero>
<issue>2</issue>
<page-range>77-83</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B9">
<label>9</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Durlinger]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[ALL]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Regulation of ovarian function: the role of anti-Mullerian hormone]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Reproduction]]></source>
<year>2002</year>
<volume>124</volume>
<page-range>601-9</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B10">
<label>10</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Jeppesen]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[JV]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Which follicles make the most anti-Mullerian hormone in humans? Evidence for an abrupt decline in AMH production at the time of follicle selection]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[MHR]]></source>
<year>2013</year>
<volume>19</volume>
<numero>8</numero>
<issue>8</issue>
<page-range>519-27</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B11">
<label>11</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Andersen]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[CY]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Concentrations of AMH and inhibin-B in relation to follicular diameter in normal human small antral follicles]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[Human Reproduction]]></source>
<year>2010</year>
<volume>25</volume>
<numero>5</numero>
<issue>5</issue>
<page-range>1282-7</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B12">
<label>12</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Grynberg]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[M.]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[Differential regulation of ovarian anti-Müllerian hormone AMH) by estradiol through a- and b-estrogen receptors]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[J Clin Endocrinol Metabolism]]></source>
<year>2012</year>
<volume>97</volume>
<numero>9</numero>
<issue>9</issue>
<page-range>E1649-57</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
<ref id="B13">
<label>13</label><nlm-citation citation-type="journal">
<person-group person-group-type="author">
<name>
<surname><![CDATA[Humaidan]]></surname>
<given-names><![CDATA[P]]></given-names>
</name>
</person-group>
<article-title xml:lang=""><![CDATA[The novel POSEIDON stratification of &#8220;Low prognosis patients in Assisted Reproductive Technology&#8221; and its proposed marker of successful outcome]]></article-title>
<source><![CDATA[F1000Res]]></source>
<year>2016</year>
<volume>5</volume>
<page-range>2911</page-range></nlm-citation>
</ref>
</ref-list>
</back>
</article>
