Background: Ovarian reserve is the number of oocytes remaining in the ovary and is one of the most important aspects of a woman’s reproductive potential. Research on the association between thyroid dysfunction and ovarian reserve has yielded controversial results. In our study, we aimed to investigate the relationship between thyroid-stimulating hormone (TSH) levels and ovarian reserve markers. Methods: From 1443 women seeking infertility care, the data of 1396 women aged between 20–45 years old who had a body mass index between 18–30 kg/m² were recruited for this retrospective study. The anti-Müllerian hormone (AMH) and TSH relationship was analyzed with generalized linear and polynomial regression. Results: Median age, follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH), AMH, and TSH levels were 36.79 years, 9.55 IU/L, 3.57 pmol/L, and 1.80 mIU/L, respectively. Differences between TSH groups were statistically significant in terms of AMH level, antral follicle count (AFC), and age (p = 0.007 and p = 0.038, respectively). A generalized linear regression model could not explain age-matched TSH levels concerning AMH levels (p > 0.05). TSH levels were utilized in polynomial regression models of AMH, and the 2^nd degree was found to have the best fit. The inflection point of the model was 2.88 mIU/L. Conclusions: Our study shows a correlation between TSH and AMH values in a population of infertile women. Our results are as follows: a TSH value of 2.88 mIU/L yields the highest AMH result. It was also found that AMH and AFC were positively correlated, while AMH and FSH were negatively correlated.

Background: Volumetric evaluation is critical in living donor liver transplantation. Liver volume, depending on body weight and height, and radiological estimates have made important contributions, but some inconsistencies remain. We aimed to assess the estimated and radiological liver volumes with respect to actual graft weight and potential factors contributing to inaccuracy. Method: A total of 623 donors were evaluated in this retrospective study. The estimated liver volumes were calculated with the Vauthey formula. The laboratory and liver biopsy results were obtained. Three-dimensional liver tomography was used to assess liver volume. Actual graft weight was measured on the back table after perfusion. Graft types were recorded. A discrepancy of more than 10% is accepted as discordant. The possible reasons were evaluated. Results: The mean estimated liver volume and radiological liver volume were 1216 cm³ and 1290 cm³, respectively. The mean radiological right lobe volume and the actual right lobe graft weight were 815 and 846, respectively. Liver density, liver steatosis percentage, blood cholesterol levels, blood triglyceride levels, and blood total bilirubin levels are factors contributing to the disparity between the estimated and radiological volume differences. Vitamin B12 and albumin levels were associated with the discrepancy between radiological liver volume and actual graft weight. Underestimation was significant in the left lateral lobe. Conclusions: Three-dimensional volumetry is useful for size matching. Discrepancies of more than 10% are attributable to liver steatosis or splitting lines.