This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 3.0 License.
Speroff L, Glass RH, Kase NG. Clinical gynecologic endocrinology and infertility. 5th ed. Baltimore: Williams &Wilkins, 1994:809-39.SperoffLGlassRHKaseNG5th edBaltimoreWilliams &Wilkins199480939Search in Google Scholar
American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee on Gynecolocic Practice and Practice Committee. Female age-related fertility decline. Committee opinion 589. Feril Steril. 2014;101:6334. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.12.032.American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists Committee on Gynecolocic Practice and Practice CommitteeFemale age-related fertility decline2014101633410.1016/j.fertnstert.2013.12.032Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Balasch J, Gratacos E. Delayed childbearing: effects on fertility and the outcome of pregnancy. Curr Opin Obstet Gynecol. 2012;24:187-93. doi: 10.1097/GCO.0b013e3283517908.BalaschJGratacosEDelayed childbearing: effects on fertility and the outcome of pregnancy2012241879310.1097/GCO.0b013e3283517908Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Hassold T, Hall H, Hunt P. The origine of human aneuploidy: where we have been, were we are going. Hum Mol Genet. 2007;16:203-8. doi: 10.1093/humrep/ddm243.HassoldTHallHHuntPThe origine of human aneuploidy: where we have been, were we are going200716203810.1093/humrep/ddm243Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Leridon H. Can assisted reproduction technology compensate for the natural decline in fertility with age? A model assessment. Hum Reprod. 2004;19:1548-53. doi: 10. 1093/humrep/deh304.LeridonHCan assisted reproduction technology compensate for the natural decline in fertility with age? A model assessment20041915485310. 1093/humrep/deh304Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Baird DT, Collins J, Egozcue J, Evers LH, Gianaroli L, Leridon H, et al. ESHRE Capri Workshop Group. Fertility and aging. Hum Repord Update. 2005;11:261-76. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmi006.BairdDTCollinsJEgozcueJEversLHGianaroliLLeridonHet alESHRE Capri Workshop Group2005112617610.1093/humupd/dmi006Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Goldman MB, Thornton KL, Ryley D, Alper MM, Fung JL, Hornstein MD, et al. A randomized clinical trial to determine optimal infertility treatment in older couples: the Forty and Over Treatment Trial (FORT-T). Fertil Steril. 2014;101:1574-81. doi: 10.1016/j. fertnstert.2014.03.012.GoldmanMBThorntonKLRyleyDAlperMMFungJLHornsteinMDet alA randomized clinical trial to determine optimal infertility treatment in older couples: the Forty and Over Treatment Trial (FORT-T)201410115748110.1016/j. fertnstert.2014.03.012Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Armstrong S, Akande V. What is the best treatment option for infertile women aged 40 and over. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2013;30:667-71. doi: 10.1007/s10815-013-9980-6.ArmstrongSAkandeVWhat is the best treatment option for infertile women aged 40 and over2013306677110.1007/s10815-013-9980-6Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Klipstein S, Regan M, Ryley DA, Goldman MB, Alper MM, Reindollar RH. One last chance for pregnancy: a review of 2,705 in vitro fertilization cycles initiated in women age 40 years and above. Fertil Steril. 2005;84:435-45. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert. 2005.02.020.KlipsteinSReganMRyleyDAGoldmanMBAlperMMReindollarRHOne last chance for pregnancy: a review of 2,705 in vitro fertilization cycles initiated in women age 40 years and above2005844354510.1016/j.fertnstert. 2005.02.020Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Tsafrir A, Simon A, Revel A, Reubinoff B, Lewin A, Laufer N. Retrospective analysis of 1217 IVF cycles in women aged 40 years and older. Reprod BioMed Online. 2007;14:348-55.TsafrirASimonARevelAReubinoffBLewinALauferNRetrospective analysis of 1217 IVF cycles in women aged 40 years and older2007143485510.1016/S1472-6483(10)60878-4Search in Google Scholar
Hipp H, Crawford S, Kawwass JF, Boulet SL, Grainger DA, Kissin DM, et al. National trends and outcomes of autologous in vitro fertilization cycles among women ages 40 years and older. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2017;34:885-9. doi: 10.1007/s10815-017-0926-2.HippHCrawfordSKawwassJFBouletSLGraingerDAKissinDMet alNational trends and outcomes of autologous in vitro fertilization cycles among women ages 40 years and older201734885910.1007/s10815-017-0926-2547654128455751Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Hourvitz A, Machtinger R, Maman E, Baum M, Dor J, Levron J. Assisted reproduction in women over 40 years of age: how old is too old? Reprod Biomed Online. 2009;19:599-603.HourvitzAMachtingerRMamanEBaumMDorJLevronJAssisted reproduction in women over 40 years of age: how old is too old?20091959960310.1016/j.rbmo.2009.04.002Search in Google Scholar
Serour G, Mansour R, Serour A, Abulghar M, Amin Y, Kamal O, et al. Analysis of 2,386 consecutive cycles of in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection using autologuos oocytes in women aged 40 years or above. Fertil Steril. 2010;94:1707-12. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.09.044.SerourGMansourRSerourAAbulgharMAminYKamalOet alAnalysis of 2,386 consecutive cycles of in vitro fertilization or intracytoplasmic sperm injection using autologuos oocytes in women aged 40 years or above20109417071210.1016/j.fertnstert.2009.09.044Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Klitzman RL. How old is too old? Challenges faced by clinicians concerning age cutoffs for patients undergoing in vitro fertilization. Fertil Steril. 2016;106:216-24. doi: 10.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.03.030.KlitzmanRLHow old is too old? Challenges faced by clinicians concerning age cutoffs for patients undergoing in vitro fertilization20161062162410.1016/j.fertnstert.2016.03.030Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Alviggi C, Humaidan P, Howles CM, Tredway D, Hillieret SG. Biological versus chronological ovarian age: Implications for assisted reproductive technology. Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2009;7:101. doi: 10.1186/1477-7827-7-101.AlviggiCHumaidanPHowlesCMTredwayDHillieretSGBiological versus chronological ovarian age: Implications for assisted reproductive technology2009710110.1186/1477-7827-7-101Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Ethics Committee of American Society for Reproductive Medicine. Fertility treatment when the prognosis is very poor or futile: a committee opinion. Fertil Steril. 2012;98:e6-9. doi: 10.1016/j. fertnstert.2012.03.045.Ethics Committee of American Society for Reproductive MedicineFertility treatment when the prognosis is very poor or futile: a committee opinion201298e6910.1016/j. fertnstert.2012.03.045Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Knez J, Kovačič B, Medved M, Vlaisavljević V. What is the value of anti-Müllerian hormone in predicting the response to ovarian stimulation with GnRH agonist and antagonist protocols? Reprod Biol Endocrinol. 2015;13:58. doi: 10.1186/s12958-015-0049-5.KnezJKovačičBMedvedMVlaisavljevićVWhat is the value of anti-Müllerian hormone in predicting the response to ovarian stimulation with GnRH agonist and antagonist protocols?2015135810.1186/s12958-015-0049-5Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Kovačič B, Vlaisavljević V, Reljič M, Čižek-Sajko M. Developmental capacity of different morphological types of day 5 human morulae and blastocysts. Reprod BioMed Online. 2004;8:687-94.KovačičBVlaisavljevićVReljičMČižek-SajkoMDevelopmental capacity of different morphological types of day 5 human morulae and blastocysts200486879410.1016/S1472-6483(10)61650-1Search in Google Scholar
Kovačič B, Vlaisavljević V. Importance of blastocyst morphology in selection for transfer. In: Wu B, ed. Advances in embryo transfer. Rijeka: Intech, 2012:161-77.KovačičBVlaisavljevićVImportance of blastocyst morphology in selection for transferWuBRijekaIntech20121617710.5772/37891Search in Google Scholar
Park HJ, Lyu SW, Seok HH, Yoon TK, Lee SW. 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. Clin Exp Reprod Med. 2015;42:143-8. doi: 10.5653/cerm.2015.42.4.143.ParkHJLyuSWSeokHHYoonTKLeeSWAnti-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 age201542143810.5653/cerm.2015.42.4.143472459826816873Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Lee Y, Lee HJ, Jayeon Kim, Lyu SW, Kim YS, Lee WS, et al. Predictive value of antral follicle count and serum anti-Müllerian hormone: which is better for live birth prediction in patients aged over 40 with their first IVF treatment? Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2018;221:151-5. doi: 10.1016/j.ejogrb.2017.12.047.LeeYLeeHJJayeonKimLyuSWKimYSLeeWSet al2018221151510.1016/j.ejogrb.2017.12.04729306180Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Kim HO, Sung N, Song IO. Predictors of live birth and pregnancy success after in vitro fertilization in infertile women aged 40 and over. Clin Exp Reprod Med. 2017;44:111-7. doi: 10.5653/ cerm.2017.44.2.111.KimHOSungNSongIOPredictors of live birth and pregnancy success after in vitro fertilization in infertile women aged 40 and over201744111710.5653/ cerm.2017.44.2.111Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Sunkara SK, Rittenberg V, Raine-Fenning N, Bhattacharya S, Zamora J, Coomarasamy A. Association between the number of eggs and live birth in IVF treatment: an analysis of 400 135 treatment cycles. Hum Reprod. 2011;26:1768-74. doi: 10.1093/humrep/der106.SunkaraSKRittenbergVRaine-FenningNBhattacharyaSZamoraJCoomarasamyAAssociation between the number of eggs and live birth in IVF treatment: an analysis of 400 135 treatment cycles20112617687410.1093/humrep/der10621558332Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Lensen SF, Wilkinson J, Leijdekkers JA, La Marca A, Mol BWJ, Marjoribanks J, et al. Individualised gonadotropin dose selection using markers of ovarian reserve for women undergoing in vitro fertilisation plus intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI). Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2018;2:CD012693. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD012693.pub2.LensenSFWilkinsonJLeijdekkersJALaMarca AMolBWJMarjoribanksJet alIndividualised gonadotropin dose selection using markers of ovarian reserve for women undergoing in vitro fertilisation plus intracytoplasmic sperm injection (IVF/ICSI)20182CD01269310.1002/14651858.CD012693.pub2649106429388198Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Haas J, Zilberger E, Machtinger R, Kedem A, Hourvitz A, Orvieto R. Do poor respoder patients benefit from increasing the daily gonadotropin dose during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation for IVF? Gynecol Endocrinol. 2015;31:79-82. doi: 10.3109/09513590.2014.959919.HaasJZilbergerEMachtingerRKedemAHourvitzAOrvietoRDo poor respoder patients benefit from increasing the daily gonadotropin dose during controlled ovarian hyperstimulation for IVF?201531798210.3109/09513590.2014.95991925223892Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Toftager M , Bogstad J, Løssl K, Prætorius L, Zedeler A, Bryndorf T, et al. Cumulative live birth rates after one ART cycle including all subsequent frozen-thaw cycles in 1050 women: secondary outcome of an RCT comparing GnRH-antagonist and GnRH-agonist protocols. Hum Reprod. 2017;32: 556-67. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dew358.ToftagerMBogstadJLøsslKPrætoriusLZedelerABryndorfTet alCumulative live birth rates after one ART cycle including all subsequent frozen-thaw cycles in 1050 women: secondary outcome of an RCT comparing GnRH-antagonist and GnRH-agonist protocols2017325566710.1093/humrep/dew35828130435Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Drakopoulos P, Blockeel C, Stoop D, Camus M, de Vos M, Tournaye H, et al. Conventional ovarian stimulation and single embryo transfer for IVF/ICSI: how many oocytes do we need to maximize cumulative live birth rates after utilization of all fresh and frozen embryos? Hum Reprod. 2016;31:370-6. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dev316.DrakopoulosPBlockeelCStoopDCamusMde VosMTournayeHet al201631370610.1093/humrep/dev31626724797Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Gunnala V, Irani M, Melinck A, Rosenwaks Z, Spandorfer S. One thousand seventy-eight autologous IVF cycles in women 45 years and older: the largest single-center cohort to date. J Assist Reprod Genet. 2018;35:435-40. doi: 10.1007/s10815-017-1088-y.GunnalaVIraniMMelinckARosenwaksZSpandorferSOne thousand seventy-eight autologous IVF cycles in women 45 years and older: the largest single-center cohort to date2018354354010.1007/s10815-017-1088-y590406129143944Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
McLernon DJ, Maheshwari A, Lee AJ, Bhattacharya S. Cumulative live birth rates after one or more complete cycles of IVF: a population-based study of linked cycle data from 178,898 women. Hum Reprod. 2016;31:572-81. doi: 10.1093/humrep/dev336.McLernonDJMaheshwariALeeAJBhattacharyaSCumulative live birth rates after one or more complete cycles of IVF: a population-based study of linked cycle data from 178,898 women2016315728110.1093/humrep/dev33626783243Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Van Loendersloot LL, van Wely M, Limpens J, Bossuyt PMM, Repping S, van der Veen F. Predictive factors in in vitro fertilization (IVF): a systematic review and meta-analysis. Hum Reprod Update. 2010;16:577-89. doi: 10.1093/humupd/dmq015.VanLoendersloot LLvanWely MLimpensJBossuytPMMReppingSvander Veen FPredictive factors in in vitro fertilization (IVF): a systematic review and meta-analysis2010165778910.1093/humupd/dmq01520581128Open DOISearch in Google Scholar
Broekmans FJ. Testing for ovarian reserbve in assisted reproduction programs: the current point of view. Facts Views Vis Obgyn. 2009:1:79-87.BroekmansFJTesting for ovarian reserbve in assisted reproduction programs: the current point of view200917987Search in Google Scholar
La Marca A, Ferraretti AP, Palermo R, Ubaldi FM. The use of ovarian reserve markers in IVF clinical practice: a national consensus. Gynecol Endocrinol. 2015;32:1-5. doi: 10.3109/09513590.2015.1102879.LaMarca AFerrarettiAPPalermoRUbaldiFMThe use of ovarian reserve markers in IVF clinical practice: a national consensus2015321510.3109/09513590.2015.110287926531067Open DOISearch in Google Scholar