Advanced search

Anti Mullein Hormone

(17 Posts)
CandyCrush77 Thu 28-Apr-16 16:03:15

Just had fertility check up and the blood test showed gave a score of 7.10 for the anti mullerian hormone. I am 39 and the dr said my score was normal but the optimum score would be 10. Does this mean it's going to be harder to get pregnant or just how many eggs I have left?

Chattycat78 Thu 28-Apr-16 17:08:10

Good question, and to be honest the answer depends who you ask. I had a very low amh score at 34 (2.8) and was told I would need IVF to conceive because of this. However, I got pregnant immediately after hearing this (although was a miscarriage). I subsequently went on to have successful IVF- first round successful. When my ds was 9 months old we started trying straight away and I conceived in one month. Some doctors say low amh makes it harder to conceive, but others say it just reflects the number of eggs you have left and the quality of those eggs is far more important. Quality of eggs is linked to age.

I would say that if you need IVF for other reasons, low amh makes it less likely to work as you will produce less eggs. However it sounds like your amh isn't that low anyway and I don't know whether you have other reasons to need IVF.

CandyCrush77 Fri 29-Apr-16 10:49:40

Thanks so much Chattycat. Do you know how the AMH score is linked to the astral follicle count? They didn't tell me how many follicles I have left but a score of 7.10 seems to suggest between 8-15 follicles, if i am reading correctly, which says low fertility. Not sure if this is low just because of my age though. Dr said 7.1 was a normal score although 10 is optimum. She said this mean not to wait and to keep TTC naturally for another 6 months max before considering other options. I don't have any other reasons to have IVF but we are awaiting the results of DH's semen test, praying it's ok.

Chattycat78 Fri 29-Apr-16 21:02:50

The lower the amh the lower the antral follicle count will be. Like I said though, the numbers give you no indication of the quality of your eggs and there is no test which can tell you about the quality. I think you can have loads of low quality eggs which are not going to create a pregnancy, or fewer higher quality ones. To be completely honest in conclusion- I'm not totally sure how much use to you these fertility tests actually are unless you find out you're not ovulating/have sperm issues/blocked tubes or something and def need IVF.

sparechange Fri 29-Apr-16 21:57:05

There are some schools of thought that say the AFC is more useful than the AMH. There are others that say the opposite.

Do you know what your FSH and LH hormone levels are? They are also useful to know.

CandyCrush77 Fri 29-Apr-16 22:47:01

Thanks Chattychat. Yes, I agree. We have worked out that I am ovulating and not identified and fertility issues, and just found out that DH's sperm tested fine. Guess we have to keep trying. It's been 6 months though, hard to stay positive!

Spare change, I don't think I was tested for those. What are they? Is the LH the ovulation hormone? I've been doing the kits and think I am definitely ovulating.

sparechange Fri 29-Apr-16 22:51:05

Fsh is follicle stimulating hormone. The higher it is, the more your body has to produce to get you to develop the follicles every month. So you can ovulate normally but only when you have very high FSH which can indicate lower reserve.
LH is the hormone that works in sync to actually ovulate. The two should be roughly equal
They are normally taken as a blood test on day 3 of your cycle, and then again a few days later to check they are rising as they should

SesameSparkle Sat 30-Apr-16 15:16:21

Your amh sounds absolutely fine to me at 39. Amh levels only really tell you about egg reserves, not quality of your eggs anyway. The actual number is only really useful for fertility treatment as it gives an idea of how you might respond to ivf drugs.

bananafish81 Sat 30-Apr-16 19:35:30

Echoing everything already said <waves to chattycat>

We rushed to IVF because my bloods suggested I was hurtling towards premature ovarian failure. However this was primarily due to my FSH rather than my AMH. My AMH was 1.5 at the age of 33, and my antral follicle count was just 5. My FSH was 17.6 (although it bounced down to 9.5 the following month, you're only considered as good as your worst FSH)

AMH is just a measure of quantity, as has already been said. High FSH is primarily a measure of quantity, and quality as has been said is primarily determined by age. However high FSH can mean poorer quality, hence this was the major concern

We weren't technically infertile as we hadn't been TTC long enough. I couldn't conceive naturally without medical assistance because I had thin lining, but it's very possible if we had done monitored cycles with timed intercourse (with oestrogen support for my lining) we might have been able to conceive naturally. But my bloods suggested I was hurtling towards early menopause so we felt we needed to pursue pregnancy very aggressively

I got pregnant on my second IVF cycle. No one understands how someone with barely detectable AMH got 17 eggs, the embryologists all asked if it could have been a lab error. I got pregnant, and have 4 embryos on ice

Sadly I miscarried @ 10w, but the tissue testing showed the baby was chromosomally normal ie the miscarriage was due to the soil not the seed, my egg and embryo quality wasn't the problem

We rushed so quickly because the FSH suggested we needed to act fast - and as my age was the biggest thing in my favour, the sooner we could act the better

Low AMH doesn't impact on TTC naturally as you're only ovulating one egg a month, so egg quantities are less relevant

CandyCrush77 Sun 01-May-16 17:34:15

Thanks all, this is very helpful and reassuring. Does anyone know what, if any, fertility treatment, would be suitable for us if we don't manage to conceive naturally? I have heard of Clomid but would I need this if I am ovulating? I don't want to jump the gun as it's only 6 months but it's hard to shake the feeling that it's never going to happen.

Jellyhead12 Mon 02-May-16 12:19:51

Hi CandyCrush, you sound like you're in the same boat as me. I'm 37 with an AMH of 8 and been ttc for over 6 months. It turns out that my short cycle (22 days) could be stopping me conceive and so I've been given progesterone to take after ovulation each month to lengthen my cycle and give everything a chance to get going. Don't know whether that applies to you or not but sounds like everything is to be expected for your age. What has your doctor advised? Good luck with it all and stay positive (easier said than done I know!).

CandyCrush77 Tue 03-May-16 11:57:50

Thanks Jelly. Both GP and private clinic where I went for a fertility check said to keep trying. The clinic said to keep trying for another 6 months then come back if still no luck. Wondering whether to leave it that long. Just checked and my antral follicle count was 8, 4 on each ovary. Is that normal for 39 years? I just checked on Google and one link said it was normal, another said low. God this is a minefield! Good luck to you. At least age is more on your side! Wish we had TTC sooner. No idea why we thought it would happen straight away.

Jellyhead12 Wed 04-May-16 14:33:06

I'm not sure about antral follicle counts, does it change each month? I had an ultrasound a few days ago and it was 20 but I've just had a blood test today which apparently shows my oestrogen levels are too low for day 8 of my cycle. There seem to be so many variables that I've no idea how anyone manages to get pregnant! Still, for some reason I'm confident that it will happen eventually, it might just take some time. I've got a good doctor who's tracking my cycle and phones me up now and again to tell me when to have sex and take tablets, it's all very surreal!

user1464093566 Fri 27-May-16 21:30:24

Hi there! Interesting to read your stories. I'm 29 and have an AMH of 9 something and FSH of 11 something. The clinic I went to for these tests due to TTC for 7 months with not even so much as a faint BFP said I should have IVF sooner rather than later. I was shocked but am considering starting in 2 months. I had some fluid in my uterus ( not a pregnancy) which needs to clear before I start. Are you going ahead with IVF? It's hard to know what to do when you're weighing up what you read vs. What a doctor advises. I'm so confused!!!

Jellyhead12 Sat 28-May-16 04:24:09

I would always go with a doctor's advice rather than the Internet as they know your particular circumstances and have medical training. However, don't be afraid to ask questions so that you understand why they're advising IVF now rather than waiting and ask them to explain the alternatives as well. What made you get the tests in the first place, the NHS will usually say you have to try for at least a year if you're under 35/36? From what you say, your AMH is low for your age but I guess it's the rate at which it's dropping at that they're concerned with. I'm still hoping to conceive naturally, I'll probably wait another few months before going in to talk about IVF. Ask your doctor for more information or even get a second medical opinion if you're still not sure. Good luck, whatever you decide to do next!

user1464093566 Sat 28-May-16 08:49:35

I am sure about going for IVF as like you say you have to trust medics advice. I guess it's just a shock as to be honest I only paid for fertility checks to reassure myself everything was ok and that these things take time! But I guess the best things are never easy to get but hopefully it'll all be worth it! Think I will get my tubes checked before starting though just so I know if there's a chance of spontaneous pregnancy!

Jellyhead12 Sat 28-May-16 11:43:15

I know what you mean, you just assume everything's going to be easy and it's a bit of a shock when it's not! Still, at least you're doing something about it and as you say, it'll all be worth it in the end.

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now