Advertisement

Contraceptive Technology

Present and Future

      Keywords

      To read this article in full you will need to make a payment

      Purchase one-time access:

      Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online access
      One-time access price info
      • For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
      • For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'

      Subscribers receive full online access to your subscription and archive of back issues up to and including 2002.

      Content published before 2002 is available via pay-per-view purchase only.

      Subscribe:

      Subscribe to Obstetrics and Gynecology Clinics
      Already a print subscriber? Claim online access
      Already an online subscriber? Sign in
      Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect

      References

        • Daniels K.
        • Abma J.C.
        Current contraceptive status among women aged 15-49: United States, 2015-2017. NCHS Data Brief, No 327.
        National Center for Health Statistics, Hyattsville, MD2018
        • Daniels K.
        • Mosher W.D.
        Contraceptive methods women have ever used: United States, 1982-2010.
        Natl Health Stat Rep. 2013; : 1-15
        • Nelson A.L.
        Comprehensive overview of the recently FDA-approved contraceptive vaginal ring releasing segesterone acetate and ethinylestradiol: a new year-long, patient controlled, reversible birth control method.
        Expert Rev Clin Pharmacol. 2019; 12: 953-963
        • Gemzell-Danielsson K.
        • Sitruk-Ware R.
        • Creinin M.D.
        • et al.
        Segesterone acetate/ethinyl estradiol 12-month contraceptive vaginal system safety evaluation.
        Contraception. 2019; 99: 323-328
        • Oddsson K.
        • Leifels-Fischer B.
        • Wiel-Masson D.
        • et al.
        Superior cycle control with a contraceptive vaginal ring compared with an oral contraceptive containing 30 microg ethinylestradiol and 150 microg levonorgestrel: a randomized trial.
        Hum Reprod. 2005; 20: 557-562
        • Simmons K.B.
        • Kumar N.
        • Plagianos M.
        • et al.
        Effects of concurrent vaginal miconazole treatment on the absorption and exposure of Nestorone® (segesterone acetate) and ethinyl estradiol delivered from a contraceptive vaginal ring: a randomized, crossover drug-drug interaction study.
        Contraception. 2018; 97: 270-276
        • Kaunitz A.M.
        • Archer D.F.
        • Mishell Jr., D.R.
        • et al.
        Safety and tolerability of a new low-dose contraceptive patch in obese and nonobese women.
        Am J Obstet Gynecol. 2015; 212: 318.e1-318.e8
        • Smallwood G.H.
        • Meador M.L.
        • Lenihan J.P.
        • et al.
        Efficacy and safety of a transdermal contraceptive system.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2001; 98: 799-805
        • Abrams L.S.
        • Skee D.M.
        • Natarajan J.
        • et al.
        Pharmacokinetics of norelgestromin and ethinyl estradiol delivered by a contraceptive patch (Ortho Evra/Evra) under conditions of heat, humidity, and exercise.
        J Clin Pharmacol. 2001; 41: 1301-1309
        • Archer D.F.
        • Stanczyk F.Z.
        • Rubin A.
        • et al.
        Pharmacokinetics and adhesion of the Agile transdermal contraceptive patch (AG200-15) during daily exposure to external conditions of heat, humidity and exercise.
        Contraception. 2013; 87: 212-219
        • Tepper N.K.
        • Dragoman M.V.
        • Gaffield M.E.
        • et al.
        Nonoral combined hormonal contraceptives and thromboembolism: a systematic review.
        Contraception. 2017; 95: 130-139
        • Zieman M.
        • Guillebaud J.
        • Weisberg E.
        • et al.
        Contraceptive efficacy and cycle control with the Ortho Evra/Evra transdermal system: the analysis of pooled data.
        Fertil Steril. 2002; 77: S13-S18
        • Archer D.F.
        • Ahrendt H.J.
        • Drouin D.
        Drospirenone-only oral contraceptive: results from a multicenter noncomparative trial of efficacy, safety and tolerability.
        Contraception. 2015; 92: 439-444
        • Duijkers I.J.M.
        • Heger-Mahn D.
        • Drouin D.
        • et al.
        Maintenance of ovulation inhibition with a new progestogen-only pill containing drospirenone after scheduled 24-h delays in pill intake.
        Contraception. 2016; 93: 303-309
        • Krattenmacher R.
        Drospirenone: pharmacology and pharmacokinetics of a unique progestogen.
        Contraception. 2000; 62: 29-38
        • Askew I.
        • Wells E.
        DMPA-SC: an emerging option to increase women's contraceptive choices.
        Contraception. 2018; 98: 375-378
        • Nelson A.L.
        An overview of properties of Amphora (Acidform) contraceptive vaginal gel.
        Expert Opin Drug Saf. 2018; 17: 935-943
        • Thomas M.A.
        • Chappell B.T.
        • Maximos B.
        • et al.
        A novel vaginal pH regulator: results from the phase 3 AMPOWER contraception clinical trial.
        Contracept X. 2020; 2: 100031
        • Steiner M.J.
        • Brache V.
        • Taylor D.
        • et al.
        Randomized trial to evaluate contraceptive efficacy, safety and acceptability of a two-rod contraceptive implant over 4 years in the Dominican Republic.
        Contracept X. 2019; 1: 100006
        • Creinin M.D.
        • Kaunitz A.M.
        • Darney P.D.
        • et al.
        The US etonogestrel implant mandatory clinical training and active monitoring programs: 6-year experience.
        Contraception. 2017; 95: 205-210
        • Reed S.
        • Do Minh T.
        • Lange J.A.
        • et al.
        Real world data on Nexplanon® procedure-related events: final results from the Nexplanon Observational Risk Assessment study (NORA).
        Contraception. 2019; 100: 31-36
        • Iwanaga J.
        • Fox M.C.
        • Rekers H.
        • et al.
        Neurovascular anatomy of the adult female medial arm in relationship to potential sites for insertion of the etonogestrel contraceptive implant.
        Contraception. 2019; 100: 26-30
        • Roe A.H.
        • Bartz D.
        Society of family planning clinical recommendations: contraception after surgical abortion.
        Contraception. 2019; 99: 2-9
        • Whitaker A.K.
        • Chen B.A.
        Society of family planning guidelines: postplacental insertion of intrauterine devices.
        Contraception. 2018; 97: 2-13
        • Sääv I.
        • Stephansson O.
        • Gemzell-Danielsson K.
        Early versus delayed insertion of intrauterine contraception after medical abortion—a randomized controlled trial.
        PLoS One. 2012; 7: e48948
        • Shimoni N.
        • Davis A.
        • Ramos M.E.
        • et al.
        Timing of copper intrauterine device insertion after medical abortion: a randomized controlled trial.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2011; 118: 623-628
        • Bednarek P.H.
        • Creinin M.D.
        • Reeves M.F.
        • et al.
        Immediate versus delayed IUD insertion after uterine aspiration.
        N Engl J Med. 2011; 364: 2208-2217
        • Chen B.A.
        • Reeves M.F.
        • Hayes J.L.
        • et al.
        Postplacental or delayed insertion of the levonorgestrel intrauterine device after vaginal delivery: a randomized controlled trial.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2010; 116: 1079-1087
        • Burke A.
        • Archer D.
        • Kimble T.
        New and emerging female contraceptives expand options.
        in: Society of Family Planning annual meeting; 2020 October 7. 2020 (Virtual Conference via Zoom)
        • Apter D.
        • Zimmerman Y.
        • Beekman L.
        • et al.
        Estetrol combined with drospirenone: an oral contraceptive with high acceptability, user satisfaction, well-being and favourable body weight control.
        Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care. 2017; 22: 260-267
        • Creinin M.D.
        • Mawet M.
        • Ledant S.
        • et al.
        P44 Phase 3 clinical trial results of a new combined oral contraceptive with estetrol 15 MG and drospirenone 3 MG.
        Contraception. 2020; 102: 291
        • Canonico M.
        • Oger E.
        • Plu-Bureau G.
        • et al.
        Hormone therapy and venous thromboembolism among postmenopausal women: impact of the route of estrogen administration and progestogens: the ESTHER study.
        Circulation. 2007; 115: 840-845
        • Chen M.J.
        • Creinin M.D.
        • Turok D.K.
        • et al.
        Dose-finding study of a 90-day contraceptive vaginal ring releasing estradiol and segesterone acetate.
        Contraception. 2020; 102: 168-173
        • Jensen J.T.
        • Edelman A.B.
        • Chen B.A.
        • et al.
        Continuous dosing of a novel contraceptive vaginal ring releasing Nestorone® and estradiol: pharmacokinetics from a dose-finding study.
        Contraception. 2018; 97: 422-427
        • Kumar N.
        • Fagart J.
        • Liere P.
        • et al.
        Nestorone® as a novel progestin for nonoral contraception: structure-activity relationships and brain metabolism studies.
        Endocrinology. 2017; 158: 170-182
        • Brache V.
        • Mishell D.R.
        • Lahteenmaki P.
        • et al.
        Ovarian function during use of vaginal rings delivering three different doses of Nestorone.
        Contraception. 2001; 63: 257-261
        • Roy M.
        • Hazra A.
        • Merkatz R.
        • et al.
        Progesterone vaginal ring as a new contraceptive option for lactating mothers: evidence from a multicenter non-randomized comparative clinical trial in India.
        Contraception. 2020; 102: 159-167
        • Duijkers I.J.M.
        • Klipping C.
        • Draeger C.
        • et al.
        Ovulation inhibition with a new vaginal ring containing trimegestone.
        Contraception. 2020; 102: 237-242
        • Brache V.
        • Sitruk-Ware R.
        • Williams A.
        • et al.
        Effects of a novel estrogen-free, progesterone receptor modulator contraceptive vaginal ring on inhibition of ovulation, bleeding patterns and endometrium in normal women.
        Contraception. 2012; 85: 480-488
        • Mahase E.
        Uterine fibroid drug is recalled after case of liver failure requiring transplant prompts EU review.
        BMJ. 2020; 368: m1112
        • Reeves M.F.
        • Katz B.H.
        • Canela J.M.
        • et al.
        A randomized comparison of a novel nitinol-frame low-dose-copper intrauterine contraceptive and a copper T380S intrauterine contraceptive.
        Contraception. 2017; 95: 544-548
        • Turok D.K.
        • Nelson A.L.
        • Dart C.
        • et al.
        Efficacy, safety, and tolerability of a new low-dose copper and nitinol intrauterine device: phase 2 data to 36 months.
        Obstet Gynecol. 2020; 135: 840-847
        • Hsia J.K.
        • Creinin M.D.
        Intrauterine contraception.
        Semin Reprod Med. 2016; 34: 175-182
        • Nelson A.L.
        • Massoudi N.
        New developments in intrauterine device use: focus on the US.
        Open Access J Contracept. 2016; 7: 127-141
        • Li W.
        • Terry R.N.
        • Tang J.
        • et al.
        Rapidly separable microneedle patch for the sustained release of a contraceptive.
        Nat Biomed Eng. 2019; 3: 220-229
        • Kirtane A.R.
        • Hua T.
        • Hayward A.
        • et al.
        A once-a-month oral contraceptive.
        Sci Transl Med. 2019; 11: eaay2602
        • Mofidfar M.
        • O'Farrell L.
        • Prausnitz M.R.
        Pharmaceutical jewelry: earring patch for transdermal delivery of contraceptive hormone.
        J Control Release. 2019; 301: 140-145
        • Weinrib R.
        • Minnis A.
        • Agot K.
        • et al.
        End-users' product preference across three multipurpose prevention technology delivery forms: baseline results from young women in Kenya and South Africa.
        AIDS Behav. 2018; 22: 133-145
        • Friend D.R.
        • Clark J.T.
        • Kiser P.F.
        • et al.
        Multipurpose prevention technologies: products in development.
        Antivir Res. 2013; : S39-S47
        • Murphy D.J.
        • Boyd P.
        • McCoy C.F.
        • et al.
        Controlling levonorgestrel binding and release in a multi-purpose prevention technology vaginal ring device.
        J Control Release. 2016; 226: 138-147
        • Anderson D.J.
        Antibody-based contraceptive MPTS: preclinical and clinical research.
        National Institute of Health, 2020 (Available at:)
        • Baum M.
        Next generation multiputpose prevention technology: an intravaginal ring for HIV prevention and nonhormonal contraception.
        National Institute of Health, 2020 (Available at:)
        • Turok D.
        • Gero A.
        • Simmons R.
        • et al.
        O4 The levonorgestrel vs. copper intrauterine device for emergency contraception: a non-inferiority randomized controlled trial.
        Contraception. 2020; 102: 274
        • Thompson I.
        • Sanders J.N.
        • Schwarz E.B.
        • et al.
        Copper intrauterine device placement 6-14 days after unprotected sex.
        Contraception. 2019; 100: 219-221
        • Asker C.
        • Stokes-Lampard H.
        • Beavan J.
        • et al.
        What is it about intrauterine devices that women find unacceptable? Factors that make women non-users: a qualitative study.
        J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2006; 32: 89-94
        • Amico J.R.
        • Stimmel S.
        • Hudson S.
        • et al.
        "$231 … to pull a string!!!" American IUD users' reasons for IUD self-removal: an analysis of internet forums.
        Contraception. 2020; 101: 393-398
        • Foster D.G.
        • Grossman D.
        • Turok D.K.
        • et al.
        Interest in and experience with IUD self-removal.
        Contraception. 2014; 90: 54-59
        • Raifman S.
        • Barar R.
        • Foster D.
        Effect of knowledge of self-removability of intrauterine contraceptives on uptake, continuation, and satisfaction.
        Womens Health Issues. 2018; 28: 68-74