Login required to started new threads

Login required to post replies

Nuvaring & Pulmonary Emblolism
Quote | Reply
Someone just sent me a link to Jenny Fletcher's blog post about having a pulmonary embolism & at the end of it she says it's from the Nuvaring. I did a quick google search, but the only information I can find are those sites that are set up to put people in touch with lawyers etc. I was hoping to find a study or something. Just wondering if anyone has read/seen/heard of the connection and have studies to back it up.

One stat I saw said using Nuvaring can increase your chances of pulmonary embolism 90%. Just wanted some more background on it. I've been on Nuvaring for a few years and already called my doctor to discuss this and other options.


Quote Reply
Re: Nuvaring & Pulmonary Emblolism [GhiaGirl] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
not a nuvaring, but my friend's 17 yr old daughter was diagnosed with pulmonary embolism, caused most likely by birth control pills. she was on them to regulate severe migraines. that was quite a shock. she was on blood thinners for a while and now she and her twin sister can never use birth control pills ever.
Quote Reply
Re: Nuvaring & Pulmonary Emblolism [GhiaGirl] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Any birth control that contains hormones increases your risk of blood clots, including PE and/or DVTs. It's not just a Nuvaring thing.
Quote Reply
Re: Nuvaring & Pulmonary Emblolism [GhiaGirl] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
This is the reason the "Patch" was taken off the market. Strokes, etc. I think it had to do with the continuous supply of hormones flowing into the body. I've never been on the ring, but always thought if a weekly patch caused a constant flow of hormones, how is something that is ok to be left in the body for 3 weeks straight any better? After many years on BCP's and now being over 35, I have sworn off hormonal birth control. When we are done having kids, one of us is going to get snipped. It's a scary thing for sure. But like one of the other posters said, any type of BC that contains hormones increases your risk for this type of complication. It sucks. I hope she's ok long term.

**********************
Harry: "I expected the Rocky Mountains to be a little rockier than this."
Loyd: "I was thinking the same thing. That John Denver's full of shit, man."
Quote Reply
Re: Nuvaring & Pulmonary Emblolism [Glfprncs] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Glfprncs wrote:
Any birth control that contains hormones increases your risk of blood clots, including PE and/or DVTs. It's not just a Nuvaring thing.

This was always the warning my docs had for me when I was taking oral contraceptives and smoking (I've since been off both for a few years). I'm pretty sure I actually had some small clots in my legs in the past, but fortunately nothing serious came of them - I used to say I had to keep drinking to keep my blood thin.

The danger apparently increases quite a bit once you get past 30; some docs will refuse to prescribe hormonal birth control if you're over 30 and smoke, but just taking the contraceptives themselves leaves you at risk for clotting no matter your age or other factors.

Cheers!

-mistress k

__________________________________________________________
ill advised racing inc.
Quote Reply
Re: Nuvaring & Pulmonary Emblolism [GhiaGirl] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
All hormonal contraceptives that include estrogen increase your risk of clotting. Nuvaring is thought to be one of the more safe options because of the lower levels of systemic hormones.

She likely had a predisposition to clot and this pushed her over. It is a known risk that increases with age... and a large reason that I have recently decided it's no longer worth it to be on any hormonal contraceptive. All medications have risks and side effects. Any time you take a medication you should ask your doctor or educate yourself of those risks to decide if they are acceptable risks for you.

I would add that pregnancy increases your clot risk WAY more than birth control.

Jodi
Quote Reply
Re: Nuvaring & Pulmonary Emblolism [Jodi] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I'm 44 and just went back on bc pills. I had my IUD taken out because it was causing painful cramps and turned out it had gotten twisted somehow. Apparently my body didn't want it anymore. I was getting very heavy and painful periods so I went back on the pill. Now I'm reconsidering my decision. No point in getting a tubal ligation at this age and it wouldn't prevent heavy periods anyway.

This is all something to think about. Thanks.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Jen

"In order to keep a true perspective on one's importance, everyone should have a dog that worships him and a cat that will ignore him." - Dereke Bruce
Quote Reply
Re: Nuvaring & Pulmonary Emblolism [JenSw] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
If clotting is a concern you can see if a progesterone-only pill works for you. It is the so-called "mini-pill". Not sure if it would be as effective against heavy periods, but worth a try. You have to take it at the same time every day, though.

Jodi
Quote Reply
Re: Nuvaring & Pulmonary Emblolism [GhiaGirl] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I did a little more reading. There is some more preliminary evidence that seems to show that the rates of embolic events are slightly higher with nuvaring than the second generation pills. The worst seem to be the 4th generation pills (ie, yaz). Still the rates go from 1-5 per 10,000 to 5-9 per 10,000. So it really is a risk benefit. As you get older the risk switches a bit from venous embolism (DVT/PE) to arterial embolism (stroke, heart attack).

Jodi
Quote Reply
Re: Nuvaring & Pulmonary Emblolism [GhiaGirl] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
risk on nuvaring way lower than pregnancy/postpartum:


the rate of venous thromboembolism for OC users is extremely low (3–10.22/10,000 women-years) and to put this risk in context by recognizing the much greater risk of venous thromboembolism during pregnancy (5–20/10,000 women-years) or in the postpartum period (40–65/10,000 women-years)
Quote Reply
Re: Nuvaring & Pulmonary Emblolism [gogogo!] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
gogogo! wrote:
not a nuvaring, but my friend's 17 yr old daughter was diagnosed with pulmonary embolism, caused most likely by birth control pills. she was on them to regulate severe migraines. that was quite a shock. she was on blood thinners for a while and now she and her twin sister can never use birth control pills ever.

My friend's young daughter was on Yaz, I believe, and at 19 developed a strange leg swelling and now permanently suffers from a lymphatic leg condition. She must wear a compression stocking, wrap her leg tightly every night, is at risk flying, and getting pregnant is also a risk.

I have had no issues with NuvaRing which prophylactically helps my migraines. The only risk they are uber watchful of is if any of migraines switch to "aura" type, which are contraindicated with bcp's and risk for stroke. My OB-GYN has discussed "weaning" me to an even lower dose now that I'm 50.

Frankly, I don't want to go cold turkey. I have been asymptomatic for the most part of menopausal symptoms, and now that I'm taking melatonin, my sleep is back to being regulated. Even she advised, "if it ain't broke why fix it"
Quote Reply
Re: Nuvaring & Pulmonary Emblolism [cindyloohoo] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
The migraine with aura thing is something women definitely have to watch out for. I get migraine with aura. In med school my doc refused to prescribe BC for me. My current doc had no problem with it, but became not worth it in my opinion. The stroke risk with BC among women who get classical migraines is unacceptably high, considering the consequences.

Jodi
Quote Reply
Re: Nuvaring & Pulmonary Emblolism [meuf] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
So, I think it is a false dichotomy to compare the risks of hormone-based bc to the risks of pregnancy/childbirth. It assumes the only form of bc is hormone-based. You are increasing your risks for all kinds of bad things by using hormone-based bc. It's that simple.

There are alternative barrier methods, including the cervical cap, that are "discrete", economical and easy to use. The Prentif Cavity-Rim cervical cap (different than the "femcap") is widely available in Europe, but very difficult to find in the US. Why? Pharma won't take it on because there's no profit in it.

No coasting in running and no crying in baseball
Quote Reply
Re: Nuvaring & Pulmonary Emblolism [Tri3] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Tri3 wrote:
So, I think it is a false dichotomy to compare the risks of hormone-based bc to the risks of pregnancy/childbirth. It assumes the only form of bc is hormone-based. You are increasing your risks for all kinds of bad things by using hormone-based bc. It's that simple.

There are alternative barrier methods, including the cervical cap, that are "discrete", economical and easy to use. The Prentif Cavity-Rim cervical cap (different than the "femcap") is widely available in Europe, but very difficult to find in the US. Why? Pharma won't take it on because there's no profit in it.

and hormonal bc protects against ovarian cancer, preserves fertility, treats dysmenorrhea, metrorrhagia, menstrual migraines amongst other things.
circulating levels of hormones in a cycle off hormonal bc is higher than on OCs

you are not "increasing your risks for all kinds of bad things by using hormone-based bc." it is not that simple - that is a ridiculous and ignorant statement.
Quote Reply
Re: Nuvaring & Pulmonary Emblolism [meuf] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
just because there are benefits doesn't mean you aren't "increasing your risks for all kinds of bad things".

I'm not saying anything about the discussion of Nuvaring etc, just that your logic fails.
Quote Reply
Re: Nuvaring & Pulmonary Emblolism [SpicedRum] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
SpicedRum wrote:
just because there are benefits doesn't mean you aren't "increasing your risks for all kinds of bad things".

I'm not saying anything about the discussion of Nuvaring etc, just that your logic fails.

it is an inaccurate statement about hormonal contraception PERIOD.
furthermore a discussion where facts are being presented an argument of "all kinds of bad things" is beyond ignorant - borders on retarded.
Quote Reply
Re: Nuvaring & Pulmonary Emblolism [meuf] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
meuf wrote:
and hormonal bc protects against ovarian cancer, preserves fertility, treats dysmenorrhea, metrorrhagia, menstrual migraines amongst other things.
circulating levels of hormones in a cycle off hormonal bc is higher than on OCs

you are not "increasing your risks for all kinds of bad things by using hormone-based bc." it is not that simple - that is a ridiculous and ignorant statement.

I have to agree here. There are many positives to birth control. And as someone who was on nuvaring for >10 years, I can say that I was always happy with it. Very low side effects, regulated periods, no terrible ovulation pains, no pregnancy... :)

It's all a risk benefit. If you think you have a higher risk of clotting (family history, smoking, etc), there may be safer options out there. If you have classical migraines, probably not a good idea. Just didn't want to come off as nuvaring bashing since I was always personally happy with it, and between nuvaring and the mirena, it's what all of my MD friends use for BC.

Jodi
Quote Reply
Re: Nuvaring & Pulmonary Emblolism [Tri3] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
I have to disagree on the "all kinds of things" as well...but will do so in a less vehement way. True, barrier methods & natural everything are "safer" in a holistic sense....more "God's way" & whatnot.

That said, I've been using the ring for over 10yrs & love it. I NEED some sort of hormonal regulation given my own whacked out system & this does the trick. Couple that with the fact that I'm a pill MORON & forget to take as much as I take...the efficacy of pill-based contraception would be nil for me. So I get a blood test done every year & I'm a lot saner, my hormones are perfectly in line, my thyroid is right-as-rain (for now, it's expected to go wonky at some point given my family history) & the world is a safer place because of the ring.

Could I develop a clot &/or throw an embolism at some point - possibly a slightly increased chance given my method of contraception? Sure....but it's better than having a child I don't particularly want right now & burdening the world with THAT. And quite frankly, I do a HELLUVA lot of other things that put me at greater risk for harm than insert a little hormone-coated ring into my body each month.......

AW
Quote Reply
Re: Nuvaring & Pulmonary Emblolism [AWARE] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
It's a fact that hormone based bc has risks that barrier methods do not. For example, here's the list of "all kinds of bad things" for Nuvaring:

http://www.nuvaring.com/...de-effects/index.asp

If you're using hormone based bc to address other problems, such as excessive bleeding, then you have to make your own risk/benefit assessment.

No coasting in running and no crying in baseball
Quote Reply
Re: Nuvaring & Pulmonary Emblolism [Tri3] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
nuvaring typical use pregnancy percentage 9% for typical use 0.3% for perfect use

barrier methods: 12-24% typical use 2-20% perfect use

pregnancy carries higher risk of "al those things" than nuvaring
Quote Reply
Re: Nuvaring & Pulmonary Emblolism [Jodi] [ In reply to ]
Quote | Reply
Jodi wrote:
meuf wrote:
and hormonal bc protects against ovarian cancer, preserves fertility, treats dysmenorrhea, metrorrhagia, menstrual migraines amongst other things.
circulating levels of hormones in a cycle off hormonal bc is higher than on OCs

you are not "increasing your risks for all kinds of bad things by using hormone-based bc." it is not that simple - that is a ridiculous and ignorant statement.


I have to agree here. There are many positives to birth control. And as someone who was on nuvaring for >10 years, I can say that I was always happy with it. Very low side effects, regulated periods, no terrible ovulation pains, no pregnancy... :)

It's all a risk benefit. If you think you have a higher risk of clotting (family history, smoking, etc), there may be safer options out there. If you have classical migraines, probably not a good idea. Just didn't want to come off as nuvaring bashing since I was always personally happy with it, and between nuvaring and the mirena, it's what all of my MD friends use for BC.

Jodi

I was involved in Phase 3/4 trials of Nuvaring. All the female docs and residents were using it and continues to be popular. As Jodi said my practice is also heavy on the Mirena/Nuvaring.
I routinely end BC talks w/ explaining what RISK really means. The average Jane has no clue how to stratify risk in their lives.

And, yes, if you want to die(statistically) get pregnant! Again, its all about risk/benefit. No free ride.
HC

---------------------------------------------------
Holden Cain, ObGyn..."People pulling people out of people"
Quote Reply