Dave J. Hendriks

TL;DR: It was shown that AMH has at least the same level of accuracy and clinical value for the prediction of poor response and nonpregnancy as AFC.

TL;DR: Transvaginal ultrasonography is an easy-to-perform and noninvasive method that provides essential predictive information on ovarian responsiveness and the predictive performance of AFC toward poor response is significantly better than that of basal FSH.

TL;DR: The predictive performance of ovarian volume toward poor response is clearly inferior compared with that of AFC, and the AFC may be considered the test of first choice when estimating quantitative ovarian reserve before IVF.

TL;DR: Cumulative pregnancy rates in subsequent cycles for patients with an observed poor response in the first cycle may be a reason to refrain from further treatment, however, if such poor response has been expected, further treatment may be avoided because of an unfavourable prognosis for pregnancy.

TL;DR: Performing a CCCT (single or repeated) has a rather good ability to predict poor response in IVF, however, it appears that the predictive accuracy and clinical value of the CCCC is not clearly better than that of basal FSH in combination with an AFC.