移至主內容

Differences in effectiveness and adverse effects between different types of progestogens combined with ethinyl oestradiol (combined contraceptive pill)

Combined oral contraceptives (COC) have an oestrogen and a progestogen component. The type of progestogen and/or amount of oestrogen or progestogen can vary per pack of oral contraceptive pills. The objective of this review was to compare currently available low-dose COCs containing different progestogens in terms of pregnancy prevention, bleeding pattern, side effects and discontinuation rates.

Thirty trials were included in this review. All the pills studied were comparable with regard to preventing pregnancy. Women using levonorgestrel-containing pills were less likely to stop taking them than women using norethisterone-containing pills. Women using a gestodene-containing pill experienced less bleeding between periods than women using a levonorgestrel-containing pill but this needs further investigation. There is insufficient good quality evidence to draw any other conclusions.

背景

The progestogen component of combined oral contraceptives (COC) has undergone changes since it was first recognised that it's chemical structure could influence the spectrum of minor adverse and beneficial effects. The major determinants of effectiveness are compliance and continuation which may be influenced by cycle control and common side effects. The rationale of this review is to provide a systematic comparison of COCs containing the progestogens currently in use worldwide.

目的

To compare currently available low-dose COCs containing ethinyl estradiol and different progestogens in terms of contraceptive effectiveness, cycle control, side effects and continuation rates.

搜尋策略

A search of PubMed, LILACS, EMBASE, Popline, CINAHL and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials databases was conducted in September 2010 to update the 2004 review.

選擇標準

Randomised trials reporting clinical outcomes were considered for inclusion. We excluded studies comparing monophasic with multiphasic pills, crossover trials, trials in which the difference in total content of ethinyl estradiol between preparations exceeded 105 µg per cycle and those comparing continuous dosing regimens.

資料收集與分析

Two reviewers independently assessed methodological quality, applied inclusion criteria and extracted data.

主要結果

Thirty trials with a total of 13,923 participants were included, generating 16 comparisons. Overall the quality of trials was low. Only four trials were double-blind. At least twenty-three trials were sponsored by pharmaceutical companies. There was less discontinuation with second-generation compared with first-generation monophasic progestogens (3 trials, 2,709 women, Relative Risk (RR) 0.76, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 0.67-0.86); this remained significant when only double-blind trials were considered (812 women, RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.66-0.94).

Women using monophasic COC's containing third-generation progestogens were less likely to discontinue than the second-generation group (3 trials, 1,815 women, RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.60-0.98) but this was not significant when only double-blind trials were considered (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.50-1.26]. Women in the third-generation group experienced less intermenstrual bleeding than the second-generation group (one double-blind trial, 456 women, RR 0.71, 95% CI 0.55-0.91).

Compared to desogestrel (DSG), women in the drospirenone (DRSP) group were more likely to complain of breast tenderness (5 trials, 4,258 women, RR 1.39, 95% CI 1.04-1.86) and nausea (6 trials, 4,701 women, RR 1.46, 95% CI 0.96-2.21].

Pregnancy rates overall were comparable but the trials had insufficient power to find potentially important differences.

作者結論

Women using COCs containing second-generation progestogens may be less likely to discontinue than those using COCs containing first-generation progestogens. Based on one small double-blind trial, third-generation progestogens may be preferable to second-generation preparations with regard to bleeding patterns but further evidence is needed. Without blinding as to treatment group, comparisons between the various "generations" of progestogens used in COCs cannot be made. Until this widespread methodological flaw is overcome in better trials conducted according to CONSORT guidelines and internationally accepted definitions, no further conclusions can be drawn.

引用文獻
Lawrie TA, Helmerhorst FM, Maitra NK., Kulier R, Bloemenkamp K, Gülmezoglu AM. Types of progestogens in combined oral contraception: effectiveness and side-effects. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews 2022, Issue 4. Art. No.: CD004861. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD004861.pub2.

我們對Cookie的使用

我們使用必要的 cookie 使我們的網站正常運作。我們還希望設置可選擇分析的 cookie,以幫助我們進行改進網站。除非您啟用它們,否則我們不會設置可選擇的 cookie。使用此工具將在您的設備上設置 cookie,以記住您的偏好。您隨時可以隨時通過點擊每個頁面下方的「Cookies 設置」連結來更改 Cookie 偏好。
有關我們使用 cookie 的更多詳細資訊,請參閱我們的 cookie 頁面

接受所有
配置