Deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism associated with hormonal contraceptives use

Czech version

Authors: M. Nováčková
Authors‘ workplace: I. interní kardioangiologická klinika LF MU a FN u sv. Anny v Brně a Mezinárodní centrum klinického výzkumu
Published in: Kardiol Rev Int Med 2014, 16(1): 36-38
Category: Cardiology Review - Case report

Overview

Since the early 1960s, it has been well documented that combined hormonal contraceptives increase the risk of venous thrombosis. Second and third generation oral contraceptives (OCs) differ in their progestin component. Third generation OCs contain desogestrel, gestodene or norgestimate while second generation OCs contain norgestrel or levonorgestrel. In spite of the fact that the third generation OCs have not shown any clinically significant benefit over the second generation OC, multiple studies and two meta‑analyses show that the third generation OC containing desogestrel are associated with approximately doubled risk of venous thrombosis. The newer generation of oral formulations, as well as non‑oral contraceptives (transdermal and vaginal), were recently studied for thrombotic risk. In the context of contraceptives use, the non‑oral route of ethinyl‑ estradiol administration seems to be more thrombogenic than the oral route.

Keywords:
deep venous thrombosis – pulmonary embolism – oral contraceptives

Sources

1. Stegeman BH, de Bastos M, Rosendaal FR et al. Different combined oral contraceptives and the risk of venous thrombosis: systematic review and network meta‑analysis. BMJ 2013; 347: f5298. doi: 10.1136/ bmj.f5298.

2. World Health Organization Collaborative Study of Cardiovascular Disease and Steroid Hormone Contraception. Venous thromboembolic disease and combined oral contraceptives: results of international multicentre case‑ control study. Lancet 1995; 346: 1575– 1582.

3. Parkin L, Sharples K, Hernandez RK et al. Risk of venous thromboembolism in users of oral contraceptives containing drospirenone or levonorgestrel: nested case‑ control study based on UK General Practice Research Database. BMJ 2011; 342: d2139. doi: 10.1136/ bmj.d2139.

4. Lidegaard Ø, Nielsen LH, Skovlund CW et al. Venous thrombosis in users of non‑oral hormonal contraception: follow‑up study, Denmark 2001– 10 BMJ 2012; 344: e2990. doi: 10.1136/ bmj.e2990.

5. Fleischer K, van Vliet HA, Rosendaal FR et al. Effects of the contraceptive patch, the vaginal ring and an oral contraceptive on APC resistance and SHBG: a cross‑ over study. Thromb Res 2009; 123: 429– 435. doi: 10.1016/ j.thromres.2008.04.022.

6. Gronich N, Lavi I, Rennert G. Higher risk of venous thrombosis associated with drospirenone‑ containing oral contraceptives: a population‑based kohort study. CMAJ 2011; 183: E1319– E1325. doi: 10.1503/ cmaj.110463.

7. Jick SS, Hagberg KW, Kaye JA. Ortho EVRA® and venous thromboembolism: an update. Contraception 2010; 81: 452– 453. doi: 10.1016/ j.contraception.2009.12.016.

8. Jick SS, Hernandez RK. Risk of non‑fatal venous thromboembolism in women using oral contraceptives containing drospirenone compared with women using oral contraceptives containing levonorgestrel: case‑ control study using United States claims data. BMJ 2011; 342: d2151. doi: 10.1136/ bmj.d2151.

9. Jick SS, Kaye JA, Russmann S et al. Risk of nonfatal venous thromboembolism in women using a contraceptive transdermal patch and oral contraceptives containing norgestimate and 35 microg of ethinyl estradiol. Contraception 2006; 73: 223– 228.

10. Jick S, Kaye JA, Li L et al. Further results on the risk of nonfatal venous thromboembolism in users of the contraceptive transdermal patch compared to users of oral contraceptives containing norgestimate and 35 microg of ethinyl estradiol. Contraception 2007; 76: 4– 7.

11. Food and Drug Administration, Office of surveillance and epidemiology. Combined hormonal contraceptives (CHCs) and the risk of cardiovascular disease endpoints. [online]. Available from: www.fda.gov/ downloads/ Drugs/ DrugSafety/ UCM277384.pdf.

12. Van den Heuvel MW, van Bragt AJ, Alnabawy A et al. Comparison of ethinylestradiol pharmacokinetics in the transdermal patch, and an oral contraceptive. Contraception 2005; 72: 168– 174.