0

It is already known that combined oral contraceptive (COCs) pills increase the risk of serious complications such as Venous Thromboembolism. However there are other options that have relatively much lower risk compared to the others.

For instance, COCs containing Drospirenone such as the brand YAZ has been known to cause a higher 6.3x the risk of blood clotting vs. older forms such as Levornorgestrel with only 4x the risk of blood clotting.

Relative risk to non-users of common progestin components used in CoCs link here:

  • Levonorgestrel boosted the risk of blood clots by nearly fourfold compared to nonusers.
  • Gestodene boosted risk by 5.6 times.

  • Drospirenone boosted risk 6.3 times.

  • Cyproterone boosted risk 6.8 times.

  • Desogestrel boosted risk 7.3 times.

However, despite the higher risks, some OB-GYNs still prefer to prescribe those with higher risk to patients. One of the reasons being that Levonorgestrel is the older generation of progestin used. As reference, my girlfriend's OB-GYN prescribed YAZ (Drospirenone) as it was a newer generation COC and I believe it would help with certain conditions such as Polycystic Ovarian Syndrome (PCOS) by improving skin acne (if present) among others. But the question is if the benefit of taking risker COCs (in term of blood clotting which can do serious damage) is worth adding the extra risk for

  • 1
    Welcome to MedicalSciences.SE. For the benefit of those who may not have seen the literature, can you please provide references to your claims regarding the differences in risk factors for Venous Thromboembolism? – Chris Rogers Jan 24 at 11:26
  • Thanks for the welcome and heads up. Added the link. For some reason every first post in a community I make gets a negative feedback lol. Don't know if it's some psychological thing to older users or my posts are just horrible – Martin Jan 25 at 18:52
  • @Martin If the sites you've been downvoted on are of an academic/science nature, it's probably the same reason. Most sites like that require supporting references for assertions of fact. – Carey Gregory Jan 25 at 20:29
  • Yes I understand I should have included the reference. Although looking around there are a whole lot posts as well suggesting the facts without references but do have some positive feedback. I mean I just noticed a higher thumbs down rate on a new community if you have a 0 reputation lol – Martin Jan 26 at 3:02
  • @Martin This site underwent a significant change in scope a year or so ago. It became more rigorous and fact-based. The questions you're referring to are probably before the scope change. – Carey Gregory Jan 26 at 3:38

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.