Progestogen-only contraception and bone mineral density: a systematic review

Curtis, Kathryn M.; Martins, Summer L.

doi:10.1016/j.contraception.2005.12.010

Cited by 142 publications

(72 citation statements)

References 52 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…However, the associations between progestogen implants and BMD are again conflicting [17], studies of other types of progestogen-only contraceptives were few and restricted to lactating women [18]. Our data suggested a weak positive association between progestogenonly contraceptive use (all types combined) and bone mass which is consistent with a recent review that use of progestogen-only contraceptives other than DMPA did not affect BMD [7]. However, our sample of progestogen-only users was too small to draw firm conclusions.…”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

“…More recently, several studies have examined the associations in young women and also presented inconclusive results [2][3][4][5], with negative associations in samples recruited from a university or from fit, heavily exercising female military cadets [2,3], and a beneficial effect in female athletes over 2 years follow-up [4]. Progesterone only contraceptives, such as depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA), have been associated with lower BMD in young women [6] but studies of other types of progestogen-only contraceptives and BMD are limited [7]. The associations between OC use and risk of fractures are mixed though DMPA users were more likely to experience stress fractures than non-users [7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

“…Progesterone only contraceptives, such as depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (DMPA), have been associated with lower BMD in young women [6] but studies of other types of progestogen-only contraceptives and BMD are limited [7]. The associations between OC use and risk of fractures are mixed though DMPA users were more likely to experience stress fractures than non-users [7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Oral contraceptive use and bone mass in women aged 26–36 years

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 92%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 97%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Oral contraceptive use and bone mass in women aged 26–36 years

et al. 2010

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…For example, numerous studies have shown that women who use depot-medroxyprogesterone (DMPA) lose small amounts of bone mineral density [19]; much, if not all, of the bone mineral density is regained upon discontinuation of DMPA [20]. These findings have led to concern about the potential for fracture among DMPA users.…”

Section: Putting Risk Into Perspectivementioning

confidence: 98%

Putting risk into perspective: The US medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use

Curtis

Tepper

Marchbanks

2011

Rev Endocr Metab Disord

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Unintended pregnancy remains a considerable problem in the United States, with health risks for both mother and infant. These risks may be increased among women with medical conditions, for whom pregnancy can lead to severe adverse outcomes. Highly effective and safe contraceptive methods are available to prevent unintended pregnancy. However, women with medical conditions and their providers also may be concerned about potential risks associated with contraceptive method use. Evidence-based guidance documents can be helpful tools for clinicians to efficiently use evidence and put risks into perspective. The US Medical Eligibility Criteria for Contraceptive Use, 2010, provides evidence-based recommendations for the safety of contraceptive use among women with medical conditions and other characteristics. While some contraceptive methods pose risks for some women, these must be considered in context and weighed against such considerations as the absolute risk of adverse events and the risks associated with pregnancy. Most women, even women with medical conditions, can safely use highly effective methods of contraception and promoting their use will further efforts to reduce unintended pregnancy.

show abstract

“…Badania nie wykazały negatywnego wpływu niskodawkowej antykoncepcji zawierającej tylko progestageny na gęstość tkanki kostnej [45].…”

Section: Gęstość Mineralna Kościunclassified

Safety profile of hormonal contraception in premenopause

Męczekalski¹,

Czyźyk²,

Kołodziejczyk³

et al. 2013

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

StreszczenieU kobiet przed menopauzą stwierdza się obniżenie zdolności rozrodczych, trudno jednak wskazać dokładny moment, w którym można wykluczyć zajście w ciążę. W związku z tym w tej grupie często stosuje się antykoncepcję hormonalną. Przyjmowanie dwuskładnikowej tabletki antykoncepcyjnej wiąże się z ryzykiem wystąpienia chorób sercowo-naczyniowych (żylnej choroby zakrzepowo-zatorowej, zawału serca, udaru mózgu), raka piersi oraz nieznacznie zwiększonym ryzykiem raka szyjki macicy. Dodatkowo wiek jest czynnikiem ryzyka rozwoju tych chorób. Jednocześnie dwuskładnikowa antykoncepcja wiąże się z ochroną przed niektórymi nowotworami oraz poprawą w zakresie objawów zespołu klimakteryjnego i regularności krwawień. Dane na temat wpływu na gęstość mineralną kości są niejednoznaczne. Hormonalna antykoncepcja jednoskładnikowa wydaje się mieć lepszy profil bezpieczeństwa, choć dostępne w tym zakresie dane są ubogie.W świetle istniejących badań dwuskładnikowa antykoncepcja hormonalna może być bezpieczna u szczupłych, niepalących kobiet w okresie przedmenopauzalnym nieobciążonych dodatkowo chorobami krążenia lub metabolicznymi. Dla kobiet, u których stwierdzono otyłość, palących, z rozpoznaną chorobą sercowo-naczyniową lub cukrzycą, bezpieczną alternatywą wydaje się wkładka wewnątrzmaciczna hormonalna lub niezawierają-ca hormonów, metody barierowe lub sterylizacja.Słowa kluczowe: antykoncepcja, okres przedmenopauzalny, dwuskładnikowa tabletka antykoncepcyjna. SummaryIn premenopausal women the fecundity rate is decreased, however it is difficult to indicate when the probability of conception is totally excluded. Because of that, in this population hormonal contraception is often prescribed. The use of combined oral contraception is linked to an increased cardio-vascular risk (venous thromboembolism, myocardial infarction, stroke), breast cancer and a moderately elevated risk of cervical cancer. Additionally, the age is a risk factor for those diseases. On the other hand, combined contraception is related with a decreased risk of developing some neoplasms and may prevent menopausal symptoms and abnormal bleeding. The data concerning bone mineral density are inconsistent. Progestin-only contraception is thought to have a better safety profile, but the data in this respect are rather scant.In the light of existing data, combined hormonal contraception is a safe option in lean, nonsmoking premenopausal women without circulatory or metabolic traits. In obese, smoking women with cardio-vascular disease or diabetes, the hormonal or copper intrauterine device, barrier methods or sterilization seem to be a safe option.

show abstract

Progestogen-only contraception and bone mineral density: a systematic review

Cited by 142 publications

References 52 publications

Oral contraceptive use and bone mass in women aged 26–36 years

Oral contraceptive use and bone mass in women aged 26–36 years

Putting risk into perspective: The US medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use

Safety profile of hormonal contraception in premenopause

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About