Norplant implants and cardiovascular disease

Association between progestin-only contraceptive use and cardiometabolic outcomes: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Aims The association between progestin-only contraceptive (POC) use and the risk of various cardiometabolic outcomes has rarely been studied. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the impact of POC use on cardiometabolic outcomes including venous thromboembolism, myocardial infarction, stroke, hypertension and diabetes. Methods and results Nineteen observational studies (seven cohort and 12 case-control) were included in this systematic review. Of those, nine studies reported the risk of venous thromboembolism, six reported the risk of myocardial infarction, six reported the risk of stroke, three reported the risk of hypertension and two studies reported the risk of developing diabetes with POC use. The pooled adjusted relative risks (RRs) for venous thromboembolism, myocardial infarction and stroke for oral POC users versus non-users based on the random effects model were 1.06 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.70-1.62), 0.98 (95% CI 0.66-1.47) and 1.02 (95% CI 0.72-1.44), respectively. Stratified analysis by route of administration showed that injectable POC with a RR of 2.62 (95% CI 1.74-3.94), but not oral POCs (RR 1.06, 95% CI 0.7-1.62), was associated with an increased risk of venous thromboembolism. A decreased risk of venous thromboembolism in a subgroup of women using an intrauterine levonorgestrel device was observed with a RR of 0.53 (95% CI 0.32-0.89). No effect of POC use on blood pressure was found, but there was an indication for an increased risk of diabetes with injectable POCs, albeit non-significant. Conclusions This systematic review and meta-analysis suggests that oral POC use is not associated with an increased risk of developing various cardiometabolic outcomes, whereas injectable POC use might increase the risk of venous thromboembolism.

Hormonal contraceptives and risk of ischemic stroke in women with migraine: a consensus statement from the European Headache Federation (EHF) and the European Society of Contraception and Reproductive Health (ESC)

Several data indicate that migraine, especially migraine with aura, is associated with an increased risk of ischemic stroke and other vascular events. Of concern is whether the risk of ischemic stroke in migraineurs is magnified by the use of hormonal contraceptives. As migraine prevalence is high in women of reproductive age, it is common to face the issue of migraine and hormonal contraceptive use in clinical practice. In this document, we systematically reviewed data about the association between migraine, ischemic stroke and hormonal contraceptive use. Thereafter a consensus procedure among international experts was done to develop statements to support clinical decision making, in terms of cardiovascular safety, for prescription of hormonal contraceptives to women with migraine. Overall, quality of current evidence regarding the risk of ischemic stroke in migraineurs associated with the use of hormonal contraceptives is low. Available data suggest that combined hormonal contraceptive may further increase the risk of ischemic stroke in those who have migraine, specifically migraine with aura. Thus, our current statements privilege safety and provide several suggestions to try to avoid possible risks. As the quality of available data is poor further research is needed on this topic to increase safe use of hormonal contraceptives in women with migraine.

Progestin-only contraception and thromboembolism: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Women with medical conditions associated with increased risk for thrombosis generally should not use estrogen-containing contraceptives; however, less is known about progestin-only contraceptives (POCs) and thrombosis risk.

OBJECTIVES

The objective was to identify evidence regarding the risk of venous thromboembolism (VTE) or arterial thromboembolism [stroke or acute myocardial infarction (AMI)] among women using POCs.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed database for all articles published from database inception through January 2016 for studies examining thrombosis among women using POCs. We included studies which examined women with medical conditions associated with thrombosis risk, as well as studies of women in the general population (either without these conditions or who were not specified to have these conditions). Hormonal contraceptives of interest included progestin-only pills (POPs), injectables, implants and levonorgestrel-releasing intrauterine devices (LNG-IUDs). Outcomes of interest included VTE, stroke and AMI.

RESULTS

There were 26 articles of good to poor quality that met inclusion criteria; 9 studies examined women with medical conditions and 20 examined women in the general population. Two studies found that, among smokers and women with certain thrombogenic mutations, use of depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA) had elevated odds of VTE compared with nonsmokers or those without mutations, although confidence intervals were wide and overlapped with odds among nonusers. One study found that, among women with previous VTE, use of POCs (including DMPA) was associated with a nonsignificant increased odds of recurrent VTE (all of which were among DMPA users); two other studies that examined POCs other than DMPA did not observe an association with recurrent VTE. Two studies found that use of DMPA among healthy women was also associated with increased odds of VTE. Two studies found that use of POCs for therapeutic indications was associated with increased odds of VTE. Studies did not find increased odds of VTE with POPs for contraceptive purposes, implants or LNG-IUDs nor were there increased odds of stroke or AMI with any POCs.

CONCLUSION

The majority of evidence identified by this systematic review did not suggest an increase in odds for venous or arterial events with use of most POCs. Limited evidence suggested increased odds of VTE with use of injectables (three studies) and use of POCs for therapeutic indications (two studies, one with POCs unspecified and the other with POPs). Any increase in risk likely translates to a small increase in absolute numbers of thrombotic events at the population level.

Safety of hormonal contraceptives among women with migraine: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Migraine is common among women of reproductive age and is associated with an increased risk of ischemic stroke. Combined oral contraceptives (COCs) are also associated with an increased risk of ischemic stroke. Use of hormonal contraception among women with migraine might further elevate the risk of stroke among women of reproductive age.

OBJECTIVE

To identify evidence regarding the risk of arterial thromboembolism (stroke or myocardial infarction) among women with migraine who use hormonal contraceptives.

METHODS

We searched the PubMed database for all articles published from database inception through January 2016. We included studies that examined women with migraine overall or separated by subtype (with or without aura). Hormonal contraceptives of interest included combined hormonal methods (COCs, patch and ring) and progestin-only methods (progestin-only pills, injectables, implants and progestin intrauterine devices).

RESULTS

Seven articles met inclusion criteria. All were case-control studies of fair to poor quality reporting on use of COCs or oral contraceptives (OCs) not further described and all reported stroke outcomes. Four studies demonstrated that, among women with migraine (not separated by subtype), COC use was associated with approximately two to four times the risk of stroke compared with nonuse. The only study to examine specific migraine subtypes found an elevated risk of stroke among women with migraine with aura, and this risk was similar regardless of OC use, although these odds ratios were not reported. Two studies did not report risks among women with migraine and COC use combined, but both found increased risks of stroke with migraine and COC use independently. No evidence was found on other hormonal contraceptives or on risk of myocardial infarction.

CONCLUSION

Limited evidence suggests a two- to fourfold increased risk of stroke among women with migraine who use COCs compared with nonuse. Additional study is needed on the risks of hormonal contraceptives, including combined and progestin-only methods, among women with different migraine subtypes.

Progestogen-only contraceptives and the risk of acute myocardial infarction: a meta-analysis

CONTEXT

The association between combined oral contraceptives (OC) and the risk of myocardial infarction (MI) has been intensively studied, and conclusions are controversial. While progestogen-only contraceptives (POC) are commonly used worldwide, their impact on cardiovascular diseases is poorly investigated and remains unclear.

OBJECTIVE

We carried out a meta-analysis based on EMBASE- and MEDLINE-referenced literature corresponding to OC marketed since 1960.

METHODS

Eligible articles published in English language describing OC or POC use and MI outcome were reviewed, and relevant ones were extracted. All types of POC and route of administration were considered.

RESULTS

Six case-control studies were identified. The combined odds ratio showed no increase in the MI risk with POC use (odds ratio = 1.07; 95% confidence interval, 0.62-1.84). This result was similar according to the route of administration, including implant, injectable, and oral POC.

CONCLUSION

Data from observational studies suggest no increase in risk of MI with POC use. However, these results are based on limited data. Further investigations are needed, especially among women at high MI risk.

Progestogen-Only Contraceptives and the Risk of Stroke

Background and Purpose— The association between combined oral contraceptives (OC) use and increased risk of stroke has been reported. While progestogen-only contraceptives (POC) are commonly used worldwide, their impact on cardiovascular disease remains unclear.

Methods— A meta-analysis based on EMBASE and MEDLINE referenced literature corresponding to OCs marketed since 1960 was carried out. Eligible articles assessing the risk of stroke in relation to OC or POC were reviewed, and relevant studies were extracted. All types of POC and routes of administration were taken into account in the meta-analysis.

Results— Six case-control studies were identified. The combined odd ratio (OR) showed no increase in the risk of stroke among POC users (OR=0.96; 95% confidence interval: 0.70 to 1.31). This result was similar according to the route of administration (either implant or injectable or oral POC).

Conclusion— Data from observational studies show that POC use is not associated with an increased risk of stroke. However, these results are based on limited data. Further investigations are needed in women with risk factors of stroke.

Risks and benefits, advantages and disadvantages of levonorgestrel-releasing contraceptive implants

Levonorgestrel-releasing implants are long acting contraceptives, approved for 5 years of continuous use. Two marketed systems, the six capsule Norplant use of tradenames is for product identification purposes only and does not imply endorsement. and the two rod Jadelle, have essentially equal rates of drug release, pregnancy and adverse events over 5 years of use. Randomised clinical trials and controlled cohort observations indicate that for the first 3 years, when pregnancy rates are at or almost zero, no other contraceptive system is more effective, although etonogestrel implants provide equal effectiveness. Annual pregnancy rates rise in the fifth year of continuous use but remain below 1 per 100 women. Annual pregnancy rates of Norplant users remain below 1 per 100 throughout 7 years of continuous use. Levonorgestrel implants provide low progestogen doses; 40-50 microg/day at 1 year of use, decreasing to 25-30 microg/day in the fifth year. Serum levels of levonorgestrel at 5 years are 60-65% of those levels measured at 1 month of use. Adverse effects with levonorgestrel implants are similar to those observed with progestogen only and combined oral contraceptives. Risks of ectopic pregnancy, other pregnancy complications and pelvic inflammatory disease are reduced in comparison with those of women using copper or non-medicated intrauterine devices. Risks of developing gallbladder disease and hypertension or borderline hypertension, although small, are about 1.5 and 1.8 times greater, respectively, in women using levonorgestrel implants than in women not using hormonal contraception. Other serious diseases have not been found to occur significantly more frequently in levonorgestrel implant users than in women not using hormonal contraception. The great majority of levonorgestrel implant users experience menstrual problems, but serious bleeding problems are not more frequent than in controls. Other health problems reported more frequently by levonogestrel implant users than by women not using hormonal contraception in a study of 16000 women included skin conditions, headache, upper limb neuropathies, dizziness, nervousness, malaise, minor visual disturbances, respiratory conditions, arthropathies, weight change, anxiety and non-clinical depression. Clinical depression is not more frequent in women using implants compared with those not using hormonal contraception (i.e. using intrauterine devices, sterilisation). Removal problems occur less frequently with Jadelle than with Norplant. The mean removal time for Jadelle is half that of Norplant. Levonorgestrel implants in nationally representative scientific samples, in randomised trials, and in controlled cohort studies have continuation rates as high as or higher than any other reversible contraceptive over a duration of 5 years. This would imply that the satisfaction women derive from the contraceptive effectiveness of levonorgestrel implants greatly outweighs the dissatisfaction that may accompany menstrual disturbances and other adverse effects associated with implants.

Safety of implantable contraceptives for women: data from observational studies

Contraceptive implants are registered in over 60 countries and have been used by millions of women for three decades. This article reviews findings from observational studies on the safety of contraceptive implants and examines the risk of specific health outcomes. Fifty-five articles were reviewed, and the body of evidence for each health outcome was summarized. Available evidence suggests that contraceptive implants are safe and, overall, implant users do not experience adverse events at rates higher than women not using implants. With respect to specific outcomes, the evidence suggests no increased risks of pelvic inflammatory disease, decreased bone mineral density, anemia, thrombocytopenia, or death with implant use. The evidence was too limited to draw meaningful conclusions for neoplastic disease, cardiovascular events, and HIV/AIDS. Nonsignificantly elevated associations were reported for diabetes, serious mental disorders, and rheumatoid arthritis. Conditions for which risks were marginally, yet significantly, elevated were hypertension and gall bladder disease.

Post-marketing surveillance of Norplant® contraceptive implants: II. Non-reproductive health

This controlled cohort study aimed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of Norplant contraceptive implants in developing countries. Women initiating Norplant implants were index subjects and women initiating intrauterine devices (IUDs) or surgical sterilization were controls. Consenting participants at 32 clinics in eight developing countries were admitted and followed-up every 6 months for 5 years. Major and less serious health events during follow-up were recorded. Incidence rate ratios of health events adjusted for clinic were estimated for initial and current method use. This paper reports non-reproductive health events. The study involved 7,977 women initiating use of Norplant, 6,625 of IUD, and 1,419 of sterilization. Five years follow-up was completed for 94.6% of the women. The study accumulated 78,323 woman-years of observation. The initial method chosen accounted for 84.4% or more of observed woman-years in users of Norplant, IUD, or sterilization. Twenty-two of the recorded 34 deaths were due to accidents, suicide or homicide. Few deaths or major health events were due to cancer or acute cardiovascular diseases and were not associated with the contraceptive method used. The incidence rates of major health events were low and with two exceptions, there was no significant excess risk of serious morbidity for Norplant users compared with controls; among Norplant initiators gallbladder disease occurred at an incidence rate of 1.5 per 1,000 woman-years and was weakly associated with use of Norplant (rate ratio 1.52 [95% C.I. 1.02, 2.27]). For current Norplant users compared to controls, the rate ratio of a combined variable of hypertension and borderline hypertension was significantly elevated (1.81, [1.12, 2.92]). The occurrence of less serious health events was also low and several of them were significantly more often reported among Norplant users. Headache-migraine, weight gain, mood disturbances, pruritus, eczema, and acne had incidence rates among Norplant users of 11.5, 4.5, 2.8, 1.5, 1.4, and 0.9 per 1,000 woman-years, respectively, and were significantly higher than in controls. Respiratory health problems, nonspecific symptoms, and several ill-defined conditions were also significantly more often reported for Norplant users, but some of the excess incidence may be attributable to reporting and detection bias. The study confirms the safety with respect to serious disease of Norplant, IUDs, and sterilization.

Impact of subdermal norgestrel on hepatic acyl-coenzyme A:cholesterol- acyltransferase (ACAT) activity: possible antiatherogenic effect

The impact of subdermally placed ethinyl estradiol, norgestrel, and the combination of the two on cholesterol metabolism as measured by hepatic acyl:cholesterol-acyltransferase (ACAT) activity was examined in the rat model. A total of 48 rats were assigned to one of 6 groups, receiving either 0.1 mg or 1.0 mg of ethinyl estradiol daily, 1.0 or 10 mg of norgestrel daily, and combinations of either 0.1 mg ethinyl estradiol/1.0 mg norgestrel or 1.0 mg ethinyl estradiol/10 mg norgestrel daily. All drugs were administered through subdermally placed time release capsules. The administration of norgestrel only in either 1.0 mg or 10 mg resulted in significantly lower rates of ACAT activity (0.77 +/- 0.566 and 0.91 +/- 0.239 pmol/mg/min, respectively). The combination of 1.0 ethinyl estradiol and 10 mg norgestrel resulted in a significant increase in ACAT activity to 2.17 +/- 0.873. This combination also resulted in significantly greater weight loss at the conclusion of treatment [247.83 +/- 6.2 g (pre) vs. 205.50 +/- 10.6 (post)]. There were no other differences in ACAT activity between groups and no other differences in weight, both between groups and pre- and post-treatment within groups. In summary, subdermally placed norgestrel resulted in a significant lowering of ACAT activity not seen with either administration of ethinyl estradiol alone or the combination of ethinyl estradiol and norgestrel in doses ranging from 0.1 to 1.0 mg of ethinyl estradiol and 1.0 to 10.0 mg of norgestrel. Significantly increased ACAT activity for the combination of 1.0 ethinyl estradiol and 10 mg norgestrel over either ethinyl estradiol or norgestrel alone or a lower dose combination suggests a dose-related threshold and drug-drug interaction for this effect. These results suggest that subdermally placed norgestrel may result in significantly lower ACAT activity and may have a potential role as an antiatherogenic treatment.

Oral progestogen-only contraceptives and cardiovascular risk: results from the Transnational Study on Oral Contraceptives and the Health of Young Women

BACKGROUND

The risk of cardiovascular disease associated with progestogen-only pills has rarely been studied so far.

METHODS

In the Transnational case-control study we were looking for a potential cardiovascular disease risk with oral progestogen-only pills in women aged 16-44 years. A total of 1058 cases of myocardial infarction, thromboembolic cerebrovascular accident or venous thromboembolism, and 3808 controls unaffected by these diseases, were enrolled. The group of women who had either used oral progestogen-only pills or no oral contraceptives included 394 cardiovascular disease cases (123 cases of myocardial infarction, 90 cases of thromboembolic cerebrovascular accident and 181 cases of venous thromboembolism) and 2366 controls.

RESULTS

The adjusted (matched) odds ratio (OR) for all cardiovascular diseases combined for women using progestogen-only pills compared with non-users of oral contraceptives was 0.84 (95% confidence interval (CI), 0.45-1.58). The adjusted ORs for myocardial infarction, thromboembolic cerebrovascular accidents and venous thromboembolism for users of progestogen-only pills were 0.94 (95% CI, 0.31-2.91), 1.60 (95% CI, 0.24-0.72) and 0.68 (95% CI, 0.28-1.66), respectively. Hence, there was no significant increase in cardiovascular disease risk associated with progestogen-only pill use. The association between cardiovascular disease and established risk factors (smoking and hypertension) was confirmed.

CONCLUSION

Although limited by the small number of exposed cases, our data suggest that there is no convincing evidence for an increased risk of cardiovascular disease associated with progestogen-only pill use.