Update on contraceptive options: A case-based discussion
ABSTRACTAs health care providers, we must engage our female patients in a dialogue about their contraceptive and fertility decisions. Empowering and educating our patients about their bodies’ hormones, the menstrual cycle, and the risk of unintended pregnancy are central to effective contraceptive counseling. Selecting an appropriate method for a patient and her medical profile is rewarding and challenging in view of new medications, novel delivery systems, and evolving research.
KEY POINTS
- Hormonal contraceptives have a number of noncontraceptive benefits, such as regulating the menstrual cycle.
- The Pearl index is the number of unintended pregnancies per 100 women per year. Rates are 15% using male condoms, 8% with oral contraceptives, 3% with depot medroxyprogesterone acetate (Depo-Provera) injections, and less than 1% with intrauterine devices or female or male sterilization.
- Estrogen-containing products should be avoided in patients with hypertension or who are at risk of venous thromboembolism.
CASE 1: CONTRACEPTION IN PERIMENOPAUSE
A 48-year-old attorney who has had two children complains of irregular menstrual cycles and of occasional hot flashes at night that wake her from sleep. She keeps a menstrual calendar; it shows her last menstrual period was 3 months ago. She took oral contraceptives for 15 years before she had her first child. She is using condoms intermittently for contraception. Her body mass index is normal at 24 kg/m2, and she does not smoke. How do you counsel her?
A variety of hormonal options
This healthy perimenopausal woman has a variety of hormonal contraception options that would have the added benefit of regulating her menstrual cycle or suppressing it altogether. These include the levonorgestrel intrauterine system (Mirena IUS), various injectable products (such as Depo-Provera or the newer depo-subQ provera 104), contraceptive pills, the Ortho Evra contraceptive patch, and the vaginal contraceptive ring (NuvaRing). Of these, low-dose birth control pills may be the best option, as they would help with cycle control, offer contraception, and better regulate hormonal fluctuations to reduce her hot flashes.
Hormonal contraception can safely be used in women in their 30s and 40s, and often until menopause if the benefit outweighs the risk.
An estradiol valerate-dienogest oral contraceptive with a quadriphasic dosing schedule (Natazia) has been studied in women up to age 50. Although it was approved in 2010 in the United States, this pill has been used in Europe since the 1990s. The 26 active pills contain tapering doses of the active drugs, with the aim of mimicking the natural menstrual cycle, similar to triphasic pills. Estradiol valerate is a bioidentical estrogen, as it is rapidly metabolized to estradiol (E2), which is identical to 17-beta estradiol and estrone (E3) produced by the ovary. A dose of 2 mg of estradiol valerate is equivalent to 10 μg of ethinyl estradiol, which is the estrogen component in most other oral contraceptives. Low-dose pills by definition contain less than 50 μg of ethinyl estradiol. Dienogest, the progesterone component, has a 17-cyanomethyl group that accounts for its strongly progestogenic and weakly antiandrogenic properties.
All oral hormonal contraceptives can increase triglycerides by inducing the CYP450 system in the liver. However, in clinical trials, estradiol valerate-dienogest also caused other changes in lipid metabolism, such as a nonsignificant increase in high-density lipoprotein cholesterol and a slight reduction in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol and lipoprotein(a) compared with ethinyl estradiol-levonorgestrel preparations.6
It is important to advise patients that, compared with users of other oral contraceptives, estradiol valerate-dienogest users may experience fewer days of menstrual bleeding and more cycles without withdrawal bleeding. This product can therefore be an effective alternative for women with menorrhagia.
All classes of hormonal contraception carry a similar risk of side effects, such as headache, breast tenderness, nausea, irregular bleeding, and mood changes. Some women have no side effects.
CASE 2: THROMBOPHILIA
A 39-year-old woman with a body mass index of 31 kg/m2 (obese) has a history of protein S deficiency with active lower-extremity deep vein thrombosis, for which she is taking warfarin (Coumadin). She experiences menorrhagia and dysmenorrhea due to intramural fibroids and possible adenomyosis seen on transvaginal ultrasonography and confirmed by magnetic resonance imaging. Hysteroscopy reveals no polyps or submucosal fibroids. An endometrial biopsy is negative for malignancy.
She desires contraception. How do you counsel her?
Estrogens are contraindicated—except, perhaps, in select cases
This patient has many reasons for heavy bleeding. She is on warfarin, which effectively inhibits synthesis of vitamin K-dependent coagulation factor. She also has fibroids and adenomyosis. The latter is a difficult condition to control, as the location of the intramuscular glands makes treatments such as ablation, dilation and curettage, and oral agents ineffective.
All estrogen-containing formulations (pills, ring, patch) are contraindicated in women with acute venous thromboembolism (VTE) and known thrombophilia. A newer agent approved for treating menorrhagia (not for contraception), tranexamic acid (Lysteda), also carries a contraindication for patients with thrombophilia or history of VTE; however, the evidence for the latter is controversial.7
The updated CDC guidelines for the use of hormonal contraceptives state that patients who receive anticoagulation for at least 3 months and who have no history of VTE or a low risk of recurrent VTE (no evidence of active cancer, no known thrombophilia) may use estrogen-containing contraceptives in select cases (category 3—theoretical risk outweighs benefits, but not an absolute contraindication).5 Although this is not common clinical practice, select patients may benefit from menstrual cycle control while receiving anticoagulation. However, other contraceptive alternatives are preferred if possible.
Progestin-only treatments such as the Mirena IUS (if the fibroids do not distort the uterine cavity) and the etonogestrel implant (Implanon) are nonsurgical options that may reduce menorrhagia and are safer alternatives for patients with thrombophilia.
The Paragard (copper) intrauterine device would provide nonhormonal contraception without diminishing menorrhagia. Obviously, barrier methods (which are less effective than hormonal contraception) can be suggested for contraception alone. A viable option for women finished with childbearing is hysterectomy, which provides contraceptive benefit and definitive treatment of menorrhagia due to adenomyosis.
Laboratory screening for VTE is not required before starting estrogen-containing contraceptives. However, one should take a detailed history and inquire about VTE events or a family history of recurrent VTE.
VTE rates among reproductive-age women are 4 to 5 per 10,000 women per year.8 The rate of VTE in oral contraceptive users is estimated as 9 to 10 per 10,000 women per year.9 However, rates of VTE associated with pregnancy and postpartum states are exponentially greater. Although recent studies have shown some discrepancy in rates of VTE across different classes of progestins,10,11 the absolute risk of VTE with hormonal contraceptives is very low.
In December 2011, an FDA panel voted 15 to 11 that the benefits of drospirenone-containing contraceptives (eg, Yaz, Yasmin, Beyaz, Safyral), such as preventing pregnancy, outweigh the potential risk. However, product labeling may change in the future to more accurately reflect the risk-benefit ratio. Stay tuned for better-designed trials to further assess VTE risk across progestins.
Health care providers should engage patients in an informed discussion about all risks and benefits of hormonal contraceptives and note this risk of VTE is higher in gravid women.
