We have located links that may give you full text access.
Risk of venous thromboembolism among users of third generation oral contraceptives compared with users of oral contraceptives with levonorgestrel before and after 1995: cohort and case-control analysis.
BMJ : British Medical Journal 2000 November 12
OBJECTIVE: To compare the risk of idiopathic venous thromboembolism among women taking third generation oral contraceptives (with gestodene or desogestrel) with that among women taking oral contraceptives with levonorgestrel.
DESIGN: Cohort and case-control analyses derived from the General Practice Research Database.
SETTING: UK general practices, January 1993 to December 1999.
PARTICIPANTS: Women aged 15-39 taking third generation oral contraceptives or oral contraceptives with levonorgestrel.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Relative incidence (cohort study) and odds ratios (case-control study) as measures of the relative risk of venous thromboembolism.
RESULTS: The adjusted estimates of relative risk for venous thromboembolism associated with third generation oral contraceptives compared with oral contraceptives with levonorgestrel was 1.9 (95% confidence interval 1.3 to 2.8) in the cohort analysis and 2.3 (1.3 to 3.9) in the case-control study. The estimates for the two types of oral contraceptives were similar before and after the warning issued by the Committee on Safety of Medicines in October 1995. A shift away from the use of third generation oral contraceptives after the scare was more pronounced among younger women (who have a lower risk of venous thromboembolism) than among older women. Fewer cases of venous thromboembolism occurred in 1996 and later than would have been expected if the use of oral contraceptives had remained unchanged.
CONCLUSIONS: These findings are consistent with previously reported studies, which found that compared with oral contraceptives with levonorgestrel, third generation oral contraceptives are associated with around twice the risk of venous thromboembolism.
DESIGN: Cohort and case-control analyses derived from the General Practice Research Database.
SETTING: UK general practices, January 1993 to December 1999.
PARTICIPANTS: Women aged 15-39 taking third generation oral contraceptives or oral contraceptives with levonorgestrel.
MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Relative incidence (cohort study) and odds ratios (case-control study) as measures of the relative risk of venous thromboembolism.
RESULTS: The adjusted estimates of relative risk for venous thromboembolism associated with third generation oral contraceptives compared with oral contraceptives with levonorgestrel was 1.9 (95% confidence interval 1.3 to 2.8) in the cohort analysis and 2.3 (1.3 to 3.9) in the case-control study. The estimates for the two types of oral contraceptives were similar before and after the warning issued by the Committee on Safety of Medicines in October 1995. A shift away from the use of third generation oral contraceptives after the scare was more pronounced among younger women (who have a lower risk of venous thromboembolism) than among older women. Fewer cases of venous thromboembolism occurred in 1996 and later than would have been expected if the use of oral contraceptives had remained unchanged.
CONCLUSIONS: These findings are consistent with previously reported studies, which found that compared with oral contraceptives with levonorgestrel, third generation oral contraceptives are associated with around twice the risk of venous thromboembolism.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app