References

medsovet

Медицинский Совет

Meditsinskiy sovet = Medical Council

2079-701X2658-5790

REMEDIUM GROUP Ltd.

10.21518/ms2023-092

medsovet-7500

Research Article

ГИНЕКОЛОГИЯ

GYNECOLOGY

Гормональное контрацептивное кольцо: выбор современной женщины

Modern women choose contraceptive vaginal ring

https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7286-6047

Думановская

М. Р.

Dumanovskaya

M. R.

Думановская Мадина Равилевна, к.м.н., научный сотрудник отделения гинекологической эндокринологии

117997, Москва, ул. Академика Опарина, д. 4

Madina R. Dumanovskaya, Cand. Sci. (Med.), Researcher of the Department of Gynecological Endocrinology

4, Academician Oparin St., Moscow, 117997

dumanovskaya@gmail.com

https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1498-6520

Табеева

Г. И.

Tabeeva

G. I.

Табеева Гюзяль Искандеровна, к.м.н., старший научный сотрудник отделения гинекологической эндокринологии

117997, Москва, ул. Академика Опарина, д. 4

Gyuzyal I. Tabeeva, Cand. Sci. (Med.), Senior Researcher of the Department of Gynecological Endocrinology

4, Academician Oparin St., Moscow, 117997

doctor.gtab@gmail.com

Национальный медицинский исследовательский центр акушерства, гинекологии и перинатологии имени академика В.И. КулаковаРоссияKulakov National Medical Research Center of Obstetrics, Gynecology and PerinatologyRussian Federation

2023

05052023

06144149

2023

Думановская М.Р., Табеева Г.И.

Dumanovskaya M.R., Tabeeva G.I.

Данная работа распространяется под лицензией Creative Commons Attribution 4.0.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.

https://www.med-sovet.pro/jour/article/view/7500

В обзоре представлены современные статистические данные о репродуктивном здоровье женщин через призму современных методов контрацепции. Проведен анализ литературы, касающейся применения контрацептивного вагинального кольца (КВК). Известно, что с позиции доказательной медицины КВК является эффективным и безопасным методом предохранения от беременности с многолетней историей применения. КВК обладает рядом безусловных преимуществ как в сравнении с пероральными контрацептивами, так и с методами пролонгированной контрацепции. Освещены актуальные вопросы, касающиеся, прежде всего, удобства применения, в частности при половом контакте, приведены данные опроса партнеров пациенток, использующих КВК. Затронута тема влияния КВК на микробиоту влагалища и эпителий шейки матки с учетом дискуссионного вопроса о повышении заболеваемости раком шейки матки при длительном приеме комбинированных гормональных контрацептивов. В последнее время наметился определенный положительный тренд в охране репродуктивного здоровья. Однако стоит признать, что нерешенных проблем еще немало, в частности, недоступность адекватных консультативных услуг по планированию семьи и современных эффективных методов контрацепции. Фармацевтический рынок насыщен различными методами контрацепции. Тщательный анализ особенностей анамнеза и результатов обследований позволяет подобрать оптимальный и безопасный метод предохранения от беременности с учетом желания самой пациентки. Принимая во внимание менее выраженный системный эффект, удобство применения, благоприятный профиль безопасности, выбор КВК в качестве метода контрацепции представляется оптимальным для женщин.

This survey introduces up-to-date statistic data on women’s reproductive health considering current control methods. It includes literature analysis on the contraceptive vaginal ring (CVR) use. Evidential medicine proves that CVR is a long-standing, safe and effective birth control method. CVR usage definitely wins the battle against oral contraception and prolonged contraception methods. The survey includes current patients’ survey results concerning CVR usability particularly during sex. VR’s effect on vagina microbiota and cervix epithelium is also covered, considering the discussions on cervix cancer increase caused by long-term use of combined hormonal contraceptives. Recently, there has been some positive trend towards the protection of reproductive health. However, we have to admit that there are still many unresolved issues, in particular, unavailability of adequate family planning counselling services and advanced effective birth control methods. The pharmaceutical market is saturated with various birth control methods. A careful analysis of medical history details and test results makes it easy to choose the best possible and safe birth control method with due regard of the patients’ wishes. Bearing in mind the less pronounced systemic effect, ease of use, and a favourable safety profile, the choice of CVR as a birth control method seems to be the best solution for women

контрацепциярепродуктивное здоровьеинтравагинальный метод доставки лекарственных средствмикробиота влагалищаэтоногестрелэтинилэстрадиол

contraceptionreproductive healthintravaginal drug delivery systemvaginal microbiotaetonogestrelethinylestradiol

References1

Bearak J., Popinchalk A., Ganatra B., Moller A.B., Tunçalp Ö., Beavin C. et al. Unintended pregnancy and abortion by income, region, and the legal status of abortion: estimates from a comprehensive model for 1990–2019. Lancet Glob Health. 2020;8(9):e1152–e1161. https://doi.org/10.1016/S2214-109X(20)30315-6.

Смелов П.А., Никитина С.Ю., Агеева Л.И., Александрова Г.А., Голубев Н.А., Кириллова Г.Н. и др. Здравоохранение в России. М.; 2021. 171 с. Режим доступа: https://rosstat.gov.ru/storage/mediabank/Zdravoohran-2021.pdf.

Smelov P.A., Nikitina S.Yu., Ageeva L.I., Alexandrova G.A., Golubev N.A., Kirillova G.N. et al. Healthcare in Russia. Moscow; 2021. 171 р. (In Russ.) Available at: https://rosstat.gov.ru/storage/mediabank/Zdravoohran-2021.pdf.

Kantorová V., Wheldon M.C., Ueffing P., Dasgupta A.N.Z. Estimating progress towards meeting women’s contraceptive needs in 185 countries: A Bayesian hierarchical modelling study. PLoS Med. 2020;17(2):e1003026. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003026.

Fan G.S., Ren M., Di W., Su P., Chang Q., Wu S. et al. Efficacy and safety of the contraceptive vaginal ring (NuvaRing) compared with a combined oral contraceptive in Chinese women: a 1-year randomised trial. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2016;21(4):303–309. https://doi.org/10.1080/13625187.2016.1186269.

Адану Р., Амарал Е.,Ами Дж.-Дж., Камерон Ш., Чипато Т., Чу Р. и др. Медицинские критерии приемлемости для использования методов контрацепции. М.; 2015. 192 с. Режим доступа: https://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/publications/family_planning/Ex-Summ-MEC-5/en.

Adanu R., Amaral E., Amy J.-J., Cameron Sh., Chipato T., Chou R. et al. Medical eligibility criteria for contraceptive use. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2015. 192 р. Available at: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/181468/9789241549158_eng.pdf.

Lete I., Doval J.L., Pérez-Campos E., Lertxundi R., Correa M., de la Viuda E. et al. Self-described impact of noncompliance among users of a combined hormonal contraceptive method. Contraception. 2008;77(4):276–282. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2007.11.009.

Nguyen B.T., Jensen J.T. Evaluating the efficacy and safety of a progestinand estrogen-releasing ethylene vinyl acetate copolymer contraceptive vaginal ring. Expert Opin Drug Saf. 2014;13(10):1423–1430. https://doi.org/10.1517/14740338.2014.948842.

Wieder D.R., Pattimakiel L. Examining the efficacy, safety, and patient acceptability of the combined contraceptive vaginal ring (NuvaRing). Int J Womens Health. 2010;2:401–409. https://doi.org/10.2147/IJWH.S6162.

Lete I., Dueñas J.L., Esplugues J.V., Marti-Cabrera M. Is the vagina an adequate route for the administration of hormonal contraceptives? Curr Drug Metab. 2010;11(10):839–849. https://doi.org/10.2174/138920010794479646.

Teal S., Edelman A. Contraception Selection, Effectiveness, and Adverse Effects: A Review. JAMA. 2021;326(24):2507–2518. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2021.21392.

Delvaux T., Jespers V., Benova L., van de Wijgert J. Acceptability and Satisfaction of Contraceptive Vaginal Rings in Clinical Studies: A Systematic Review and Narrative Synthesis. Front Glob Womens Health. 2021;2:799963. https://doi.org/10.3389/fgwh.2021.799963.

Timmer C.J., Mulders T.M. Pharmacokinetics of etonogestrel and ethinylestradiol released from a combined contraceptive vaginal ring. Clin Pharmacokinet. 2000;39(3):233–242. https://doi.org/10.2165/00003088-200039030-00005.

Mansour D., Inki P., Gemzell-Danielsson K. Efficacy of contraceptive methods: A review of the literature. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2010;15(1):4–16. https://doi.org/10.3109/13625180903427675.

López-Picado A., Lapuente O., Lete I. Efficacy and side-effects profile of the ethinylestradiol and etonogestrel contraceptive vaginal ring: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2017;22(2):131–146. https://doi.org/10.1080/13625187.2017.1287351.

Ridgeway K., Montgomery E.T., Smith K., Torjesen K., van der Straten A., Achilles S.L. et al. Vaginal ring acceptability: A systematic review and meta-analysis of vaginal ring experiences from around the world. Contraception. 2022;106:16–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2021.10.001.

Griffin J.B., Ridgeway K., Montgomery E., Torjesen K., Clark R., Peterson J. et al. Vaginal ring acceptability and related preferences among women in low- and middle-income countries: A systematic review and narrative synthesis. PLoS ONE. 2019;14(11):e0224898. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0224898.

Vargas S.E., Midoun M.M., Guillen M., Getz M.L., Underhill K., Kuo C. et al. A Qualitative Systematic Review of Women’s Experiences Using Contraceptive Vaginal Rings: Implications for New Technologies. Perspect Sex Reprod Health. 2019;51(2):71–80. https://doi.org/10.1363/psrh.12103.

Novák A., de la Loge C., Abetz L., van der Meulen E.A. The combined contraceptive vaginal ring, NuvaRing: an international study of user acceptability. Contraception. 2003;67(3):187–194. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0010-7824(02)00514-0.

Novák A., de la Loge C., Abetz L. Development and validation of an acceptability and satisfaction questionnaire for a contraceptive vaginal ring, NuvaRing. Pharmacoeconomics. 2004;22(4):245–256. https://doi.org/10.2165/00019053-200422040-00003.

McLellan-Lemal E., Ondeng’e K., Gust D.A., Desai M., Otieno F.O., Madiega P.A. et al. Contraceptive vaginal ring experiences among women and men in Kisumu, Kenya: A qualitative study. Front Womens Health. 2017;2(1):10.15761/FWH.1000122. https://doi.org/10.15761/FWH.1000122.

Kestelyn E., Van Nuil J.I., Umulisa M.M., Umutoni G., Uwingabire A., Mwambarangwe L. et al. Ring Plus Study Group. High acceptability of a contraceptive vaginal ring among women in Kigali, Rwanda. PLoS ONE. 2018;13(6):e0199096. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0199096

Sivin I., Mishell D.R.Jr., Alvarez F., Brache V., Elomaa K., Lähteenmäki P. et al. Contraceptive vaginal rings releasing Nestorone and ethinylestradiol: a 1-year dose-finding trial. Contraception. 2005;71(2):122–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2004.08.010.

Weisberg E., Fraser I.S., Mishell D.R.Jr., Lacarra M., Bardin C.W. The acceptability of a combined oestrogen/progestogen contraceptive vaginal ring. Contraception. 1995;51(1):39–44. https://doi.org/10.1016/0010-7824(94)00005-H.

Schafer J.E., Osborne L.M., Davis A.R., Westhoff C. Acceptability and satisfaction using Quick Start with the contraceptive vaginal ring versus an oral contraceptive. Contraception. 2006;73(5):488–492. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2005.11.003.

Merki-Feld G.S., Hund M. Clinical experience with the combined contraceptive vaginal ring in Switzerland, including a subgroup analysis of previous hormonal contraceptive use. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2010;15(6):413–422. https://doi.org/10.3109/13625187.2010.524717.

Pandit S.N., Chauhan A.R., Anagani M., Reddy S., Birla A., Ray S.K. Multicenter Study of Contraceptive Vaginal Ring (NuvaRing(®)) in Normal Daily Practice in Indian Women. J Obstet Gynaecol India. 2014;64(6):409–416. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13224-014-0559-7.

Roumen F.J., op ten Berg M.M., Hoomans E.H. The combined contraceptive vaginal ring (NuvaRing): first experience in daily clinical practice in The Netherlands. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2006;11(1):14–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/13625180500389547.

Creinin M.D., Meyn L.A., Borgatta L., Barnhart K., Jensen J., Burke A.E. et al. Multicenter comparison of the contraceptive ring and patch: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2008;111(1):267–277. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000298338.58511.d1.

Ahrendt H.J., Nisand I., Bastianelli C., Gómez M.A., Gemzell-Danielsson K., Urdl W. et al. Efficacy, acceptability and tolerability of the combined contraceptive ring, NuvaRing, compared with an oral contraceptive containing 30 microg of ethinyl estradiol and 3 mg of drospirenone. Contraception. 2006;74(6):451–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2006.07.004.

Gilliam M.L., Neustadt A., Kozloski M., Mistretta S., Tilmon S., Godfrey E. Adherence and acceptability of the contraceptive ring compared with the pill among students: a randomized controlled trial. Obstet Gynecol. 2010;115(3):503–510. https://doi.org/10.1097/AOG.0b013e3181cf45dc.

Battaglia C., Morotti E., Persico N., Battaglia B., Busacchi P., Casadio P. et al. Clitoral vascularization and sexual behavior in young patients treated with drospirenone-ethinyl estradiol or contraceptive vaginal ring: a prospective, randomized, pilot study. J Sex Med. 2014;11(2):471–480. https://doi.org/10.1111/jsm.12392.

Guida M., Di Spiezio Sardo A., Bramante S., Sparice S., Acunzo G., Tommaselli G.A. et al. Effects of two types of hormonal contraception – oral versus intravaginal – on the sexual life of women and their partners. Hum Reprod. 2005;20(4):1100–1106. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/deh686.

Guida M., Cibarelli F., Troisi J., Gallo A., Palumbo A.R., Di Spiezio Sardo A. Sexual life impact evaluation of different hormonal contraceptives on the basis of their methods of administration. Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2014;290(6):1239–1247. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00404-014-3323-4.

Elaut E., Buysse A., De Sutter P., De Cuypere G., Gerris J., Deschepper E. et al. Relation of androgen receptor sensitivity and mood to sexual desire in hormonal contraception users. Contraception. 2012;85(5):470–479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2011.10.007.

Sabatini R., Cagiano R. Comparison profiles of cycle control, side effects and sexual satisfaction of three hormonal contraceptives. Contraception. 2006;74(3):220–223. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2006.03.022.

Roumen F.J.M.E., Apter D., Mulders T.M.T., Dieben T.O.M. Efficacy, tolerability and acceptability of a novel contraceptive vaginal ring releasing etonogestrel and ethinyloestradiol. Hum Reprod. 2001;16(3):469–475. https://doi.org/10.1093/humrep/16.3.469.

Lete I., Cuesta M.C., Marín J.M., Guerra S. Vaginal health in contraceptive vaginal ring users – A review. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2013;18(4):234–241. https://doi.org/10.3109/13625187.2013.801954.

Rock J.A., Thompson J.D. TeLinde’s operative gynecology. 8th ed. Philadelphia, PA: Lipincott-Raven; 1977.

Brabaharan S., Veettil S.K., Kaiser J.E., Raja R.V.R., Wattanayingcharoenchai R., Maharajan M. et al. Association of Hormonal Contraceptive Use With Adverse Health Outcomes: An Umbrella Review of Meta-analyses of Randomized Clinical Trials and Cohort Studies. JAMA Netw Open. 2022;5(1):e2143730. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2021.43730.

Workowski K.A., Bachmann L.H., Chan P.A., Johnston C.M., Muzny C.A., Park I. et al. Sexually Transmitted Infections Treatment Guidelines, 2021. MMWR Recomm Rep. 2021;70(4):1–187. https://doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.rr7004a1.

Crucitti T., Hardy L., van de Wijgert J., Agaba S., Buyze J., Kestelyn E. et al. Ring Plus study group. Contraceptive rings promote vaginal lactobacilli in a high bacterial vaginosis prevalence population: A randomised, open-label longitudinal study in Rwandan women. PLoS ONE. 2018;13(7):e0201003. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0201003.

Veres S., Miller L., Burington B. A comparison between the vaginal ring and oral contraceptives. Obstet Gynecol. 2004;104(3):555–563. https://doi.org/10.1097/01.AOG.0000136082.59644.13.

Lopez L.M., Grimes D.A., Gallo M.F., Stockton L.L., Schulz K.F. Skin patch and vaginal ring versus combined oral contraceptives for contraception. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2013;2013(4):CD003552. https://doi.org/10.1002/14651858.CD003552.pub4.

Kestelyn E., Agaba S., Van Nuil J.I., Uwineza M., Umulisa M.M., Mwambarangwe L. et al. A randomised trial of a contraceptive vaginal ring in women at risk of HIV infection in Rwanda: Safety of intermittent and continuous use. PLoS ONE. 2018;13(6):e0197572. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0197572.

Chassot F., Camacho D.P., Patussi E.V., Donatti L., Svidzinski T.I., Consolaro M.E. Can Lactobacillus acidophilus influence the adhesion capacity of Candida albicans on the combined contraceptive vaginal ring? Contraception. 2010;81(4):331–335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.contraception.2009.12.011.

Asthana S., Busa V., Labani S. Oral contraceptives use and risk of cervical cancer – a systematic review & metaanalysis. Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol. 2020;247:163–175. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejogrb.2020.02.014.

FSRH Guideline (January 2019) Combined Hormonal Contraception (Revision due by January 2024). BMJ Sex Reprod Health. 2019;45(1):1–93. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjsrh-2018-CHC.

Archer D., Raine T., Darney P. An open-label noncomparative study to evaluate the vagina and cervix of NuvaRing® users. Fertil Steril. 2002;76(1):S25. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0015-0282(02)03446-5.

The authors declare that there are no conflicts of interest present.