Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Comparative Study
. 2013 Jun;11(6):1059-68.
doi: 10.1111/jth.12224.

Drospirenone and non-fatal venous thromboembolism: is there a risk difference by dosage of ethinyl-estradiol?

S T Bird  1 , J A C Delaney, M Etminan, J M Brophy, A G Hartzema
Affiliations
Free article
Comparative Study

Drospirenone and non-fatal venous thromboembolism: is there a risk difference by dosage of ethinyl-estradiol?

S T Bird et al. J Thromb Haemost. 2013 Jun.
Free article

Abstract

Background: Previous studies concluded that there was an increased risk of non-fatal venous thromboembolism (VTE) with drospirenone. It is unknown whether the risk is differential by ethinyl-estradiol dosage.

Objectives: To assess the risk of VTE with drospirenone and to determine whether drospirenone and ethinyl-estradiol 20 μg (DRSP/EE20) has a lower VTE risk than drospirenone and ethinyl-estradiol 30 μg (DRSP/EE30).

Methods: Our cohort included women aged 18-46 years taking drospirenone or levonorgestrel (LNG)-containing combined oral contraceptives (COCs) in the IMS claims database between 2001 and 2009. VTE was defined using ICD-9-CM coding and anticoagulation. The hazard ratio (HR) from Cox proportional hazards models was used to assess the VTE relative risk (RR) with drospirenone compared with levonorgestrel, adjusted by a propensity score used to control for baseline co-morbidity and stratified by EE dosage and user-type (new/current).

Results: The study included 238 683 drospirenone and 193,495 levonorgestrel users. Among new and current users, a 1.90-fold (95% CI, 1.51-2.39) increased VTE relative risk was observed for drospirenone (18.0 VTE/10,000 women-years) vs. levonorgestrel (8.9 VTE/10,000 women-years). In analysis of new users, DRSP/EE20 had a 2.35-fold (95% CI, 1.44-3.82) VTE RR versus LNG/EE20. New users of DRSP/EE30 observed an increased RR versus LNG/EE30 among women starting to use COCs between 2001 and 2006 (2.51, 95% CI, 1.12-5.64) but not between 2007 and 2009 (0.76, 95% CI, 0.42-1.39), attributable to an increased incidence rate with LNG/EE30 from 2007 to 2009. In direct comparison, DRSP/EE20 had an elevated risk of VTE compared with DRSP/EE30 (RR, 1.55; 95% CI, 0.99-2.41).

Conclusions: We observed a modestly elevated risk of VTE with drospirenone, compared with levonorgestrel. The larger VTE incidence rate observed in DRSP/EE20 than in DRSP/EE30 and the increasing VTE incidence rate with levonorgestrel between 2007 and 2009 were unexpected.

Keywords: Levonorgestrel; comparative study; contraception; drospirenone; venous thromboembolism.

PubMed Disclaimer

Publication types