Recurrent miscarriage affects 1-2% of women. In more than half of all recurrent miscarriage the cause still remains uncertain. Thrombophilia has been identified in about 50% of women with recurrent... Show moreRecurrent miscarriage affects 1-2% of women. In more than half of all recurrent miscarriage the cause still remains uncertain. Thrombophilia has been identified in about 50% of women with recurrent miscarriage and thromboprophylaxis has been suggested as an option of treatment. A randomised double-blind (for aspirin) multicentre trial was performed among 207 women with three or more consecutive first trimester (< 13 weeks) miscarriages, two or more second trimester (13-24 weeks) miscarriages or one third trimester fetal loss combined with one first trimester miscarriage. Women were analysed for thrombophilia. After complete work-up, women were randomly allocated before seven weeks' gestation to either enoxaparin 40 mg and placebo (n=68), enoxaparin 40 mg and aspirin 100 mg (n=63) or aspirin 100 mg (n=76). The primary outcome was live-birth rate. Secondary outcomes were pregnancy complications, neonatal outcome and adverse effects. The trial was ended prematurely because of slow recruitment. A live birth rate of 71% [relative risk (RR) 1.17, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.92-1.48] was found for enoxaparin and placebo and 65% [RR 1.08, 95% CI 0.83-1.39] for enoxaparin and aspirin when compared to aspirin alone (61%, reference group). In the whole study group the live birth rate was 65% (95% CI 58.66-71.74) for women with three or more miscarriages (n=204). No difference in pregnancy complications, neonatal outcome or adverse effects was observed. No significant difference in live birth rate was found with enoxaparin treatment versus aspirin or a combination of both versus aspirin in women with recurrent miscarriage. Show less
Background Obesity has reached epidemic proportions around the world. Metabolic changes in obesity and greater body mass may lead to reduced effectiveness of hormonal contraceptives, such as the... Show moreBackground Obesity has reached epidemic proportions around the world. Metabolic changes in obesity and greater body mass may lead to reduced effectiveness of hormonal contraceptives, such as the skin patch, vaginal ring, implants, and injectables. We systematically reviewed the evidence on the effectiveness of hormonal contraceptives among overweight and obese women. Objectives To examine the effectiveness of hormonal contraceptives in preventing unplanned pregnancies among women who are overweight or obese versus women of lower weight or body mass index (BMI). Search strategy We searched MEDLINE, CENTRAL, POPLINE, EMBASE, ClinicalTrials.gov, and ICTRP. We also contacted investigators to identify other trials. Selection criteria All study designs were eligible. Any type of hormonal contraceptive could have been examined. The primary outcome was pregnancy. Overweight or obese women must have been identified by an analysis cutoff for weight or BMI (kg/m(2)). Data collection and analysis Data were abstracted by two authors; life-table rates were included where available. For dichotomous variables, we computed an odds ratio with 95% confidence interval. The main comparisons were between overweight or obese women and women of lower weight or BMI. Main results We found 7 reports with data from 11 trials that included 39,531 women. One of three studies using BMI found a higher pregnancy risk for overweight or obese women. In the trial of two combination oral contraceptives, women with BMI >= 25 had greater pregnancy risk compared to those with BMI < 25 (OR 1.91; 95% CI 1.01 to 3.61). Among skin patch users, body weight was associated with pregnancy (reported P < 0.001) but BMI was not. Studies of a vaginal ring (never marketed) and a six-rod implant showed higher pregnancy rates for women weighing >= 70 kg versus those weighing < 70 kg (reported P values: 0.0013 and < 0.05, respectively). However, two implant studies showed no trend by body weight, and trials of an injectable had no pregnancies. Authors' conclusions Body weight addresses overall body size, while BMI generally reflects the amount of fat. Only one of three studies using BMI found a higher pregnancy risk for overweight women. The efficacy of implants and injectable contraceptives may be unaffected by body mass. The field could use trials of contraceptive methods with groups stratified by BMI. The current evidence on effectiveness by BMI is limited. However, the contraceptive methods examined here are still among the most effective when the recommended regimen is followed. Show less
OBJECTIVE To assess the risk of venous thrombosis associated with nonoral contraceptives (ie, injectable depot-medroxyprogesterone acetate contraceptives, hormone [levonorgestrel]-releasing... Show moreOBJECTIVE To assess the risk of venous thrombosis associated with nonoral contraceptives (ie, injectable depot-medroxyprogesterone acetate contraceptives, hormone [levonorgestrel]-releasing intrauterine devices, a contraceptive patch, or a contraceptive implant). METHODS AND RESULTS Analyses were performed in the Multiple Environmental and Genetic Assessment study, a large case-control study on risk factors for venous thrombosis. For the current analyses, we selected premenopausal women, aged 18 to 50 years, who were not pregnant nor within 4 weeks postpartum and were not using oral contraceptives; 446 patients and 1146 controls were included. Injectable depot-medroxyprogesterone acetate contraceptives were associated with a 3.6-fold (95% CI, 1.8- to 7.1-fold) increased risk of venous thrombosis compared with nonusers of hormonal contraceptives. The use of a levonorgestrel intrauterine device was not associated with an increased risk (odds ratio, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.1 to 1.1). Unfortunately, the few women using a contraceptive patch or an implant prevented a reliable estimate of the risk of thrombosis. CONCLUSIONS The risk of venous thrombosis was increased for injectable depot-medroxyprogesterone acetate contraceptive users, while we were able to reliably exclude an increased risk associated with levonorgestrel intrauterine device use. Therefore, the latter seems to be the safest option regarding the risk of venous thrombosis. Show less
Objective-To assess the risk of venous thrombosis associated with nonoral contraceptives (ie, injectable depot-medroxyprogesterone acetate contraceptives, hormone [levonorgestrel]-releasing... Show moreObjective-To assess the risk of venous thrombosis associated with nonoral contraceptives (ie, injectable depot-medroxyprogesterone acetate contraceptives, hormone [levonorgestrel]-releasing intrauterine devices, a contraceptive patch, or a contraceptive implant). Methods and Results-Analyses were performed in the Multiple Environmental and Genetic Assessment study, a large case-control study on risk factors for venous thrombosis. For the current analyses, we selected premenopausal women, aged 18 to 50 years, who were not pregnant nor within 4 weeks postpartum and were not using oral contraceptives; 446 patients and 1146 controls were included. Injectable depot-medroxyprogesterone acetate contraceptives were associated with a 3.6-fold (95% CI, 1.8- to 7.1-fold) increased risk of venous thrombosis compared with nonusers of hormonal contraceptives. The use of a levonorgestrel intrauterine device was not associated with an increased risk (odds ratio, 0.3; 95% CI, 0.1 to 1.1). Unfortunately, the few women using a contraceptive patch or an implant prevented a reliable estimate of the risk of thrombosis. Conclusion-The risk of venous thrombosis was increased for injectable depot-medroxyprogesterone acetate contraceptive users, while we were able to reliably exclude an increased risk associated with levonorgestrel intrauterine device use. Therefore, the latter seems to be the safest option regarding the risk of venous thrombosis. (Arterioscler Thromb Vasc Biol. 2010;30:2297-2300.) Show less
Background: The risk of recurrent venous thrombosis is higher in men than in women, and this is so far unexplained. We set out to determine the influence of age, time between first and second event... Show moreBackground: The risk of recurrent venous thrombosis is higher in men than in women, and this is so far unexplained. We set out to determine the influence of age, time between first and second event, type of first event, oral contraception, pregnancy and surgery. Methods: We performed a prospective follow-up study of 474 patients with a first objective diagnosis of deep vein thrombosis, aged 18-70 years (Leiden Thrombophilia Study cohort). Results: During 3477 person-years of follow-up, 90 recurrences occurred. The overall incidence rates of recurrence (IRs) were 40.9 per 1000 person-years in men and 15.8 per 1000 person years in women. Men with an unprovoked first event had the highest risk of recurrence, with almost one-third experiencing a second unprovoked event within 8 years (IR 41.2 per 1000 person-years). This risk was three-fold lower in women [IR 14.2 per 1000 person-years; hazard ratio 2.8 (95% confidence interval 1.4-5.7)]. Age at diagnosis had little effect on recurrence rate, and nor had time elapsed since the first event. In women, almost half of the recurrences were provoked and were mainly related to oral contraceptive use or pregnancy. Conclusions: The higher recurrence rate in men than in women is not the result of differences in the environmental or transient risk factors that we studied. The risk profile for a second thrombotic event is clearly different from that of a first. Show less
