Related Experiment Videos
The contraceptive vaginal ring (NuvaRing) and hemostasis: a comparative study
E M Magnusdóttir1, R I Bjarnadóttir, P T Onundarson
1Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Landspitali University Hospital, Landspítalinn, P.O. Box 10, IS-121, Reykjavik, Iceland. ebbamag@landspitali.is
Contraception
|May 26, 2004
Summary
This study found minimal effects on blood clotting and clot breakdown for both NuvaRing and oral levonorgestrel/ethinylestradiol (LNG/EE) contraceptives. Hemostatic variables remained largely comparable between the two contraceptive methods.
Area of Science:
- Reproductive Endocrinology
- Hematology
- Pharmacology
Background:
- Hormonal contraceptives can influence hemostatic variables.
- Understanding these effects is crucial for assessing thrombotic risk.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare changes in hemostatic variables between NuvaRing and oral levonorgestrel 150 microg/ethinylestradiol 30 microg (LNG/EE).
Main Methods:
- Open-label, nonrandomized study.
- 87 women used either NuvaRing or oral LNG/EE for six cycles.
- Assessed procoagulation, anticoagulation, and fibrinolytic activity.
Main Results:
- Most procoagulation variables showed no difference; Factor VII increased with NuvaRing and decreased with oral LNG/EE.
- Anticoagulation (antithrombin, protein C) and fibrinolytic activity (tissue plasminogen activator) were comparable.
- No significant differences in fibrin turnover were observed.
Conclusions:
- Both NuvaRing and oral LNG/EE demonstrate a minimal impact on hemostatic variables.
- The hemostatic profiles suggest comparable safety regarding thrombosis risk between the two methods.