ArticleOpen access journal of contraception2018
Venous thrombosis and hormonal contraception: what's new with estradiol-based hormonal contraceptives?
Article in Open access journal of contraception, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
13 citing papers in PubMed, 58 citations in OpenAlex.
- Role of Menstrual Bleeding Assessments in Sickle Cell Clinics.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Adipose-androgen crosstalk in polycystic ovary syndrome: mechanisms and therapeutic implications.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2025Review
- Experts' view on the role of oestrogens in combined oral contraceptives: emphasis on oestetrol (E4).Frontiers in global women's health · 2024Article
- A Multi-Institutional Informed Consent Proposal as a Prevention Tool for Combined Oral Contraceptive Intake and Thrombotic Risk.Journal of personalized medicine · 2023Review
- Restoration of serum estradiol and reduced incidence of miscarriage in patients with low serum estradiol during pregnancy: a retrospective cohort study using a multifactorial protocol including DHEA.Frontiers in reproductive health · 2023Article
- Case Report: Upper limb superficial venous thrombosis associated with oral contraceptives mimicking soft tissue mass.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2023Article
- Obesity and contraceptive use: impact on cardiovascular risk.ESC heart failure · 2022Review
- Systemic hormonal contraception and risk of venous thromboembolism.Acta obstetricia et gynecologica Scandinavica · 2022Article
- Analysis of the Role of Female Hormones During Infection by COVID-19.Revista brasileira de ginecologia e obstetricia : revista da Federacao Brasileira das Sociedades de Ginecologia e Obstetricia · 2021Review
- Combined Oral Contraceptives and Venous Thromboembolism: Review and Perspective to Mitigate the Risk.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2021Review
- Pharmacological Approaches to Controlling Cardiometabolic Risk in Women with PCOS.International journal of molecular sciences · 2020Review
- Hormones and thrombosis: risk across the reproductive years and beyond.Translational research : the journal of laboratory and clinical medicine · 2020Review
- Combined hormonal contraceptive use in Europe before and after the European Commission mandated changes in product information.Contraception: X · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveEstradiol (E2)-based hormonal contraceptives impact less than ethinylstradiol (EE) contraceptives on venous thromboembolism (VTE) in comparison to formulations with EE. STUDY
designIn this article, the pharamacologic data of EE and E2 were briefly reviewed, along with the induced biologic effect. These data were then related to a recent large international prospective, controlled, non-interventional cohort active surveillance study, on the cardiovascular risk of users of different types of combined estroprogestin contraceptive (CEPC).
resultsThe crude HR for E2-valerate (E2V)/dienogest vs other CEPCs with EE was 0.8 (95% CI, 0.4-1.6), but when the data were corrected for age, body mass index, duration of use, and family history of VTE, the corresponding adjusted HR was 0.5 (95% CI, 0.2-1.0). A comparison of the E2V/dienogest and EE/levonorgestrel groups showed that the two contraceptives induced a similar VTE risk with the crude and adjusted VTE HRs of 0.7 (95% CI, 0.3-1.8) and 0.5 (95% CI, 0.2-1.3), respectively. Similar results were obtained when the observation was prolonged to January 2017.
conclusionsThe reduced impact of E2 vs EE on coagulation translates into the epidemiologic evidence of a reduced number of events in E2V vs EE users, when progestins other than levonorgestrel are used. However, E2 may continue to negatively impact on the risk of VTE, and this should not be forgotten at the time of prescription. Family history of VTE or thrombophilia, age, and obesity are risk factors for VTE too. If these risk factors are not taken into consideration and excluded, they can overcome or hide the higher safety of E2 vs CEPCs with EE.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.