Emergency contraception mechanism of action

Revision as of 21:33, 29 July 2020 by WikiBot (talk | contribs) (Bot: Removing from Primary care)
(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Emergency contraception Microchapters

Home

Patient Information

Overview

Historical Perspective

Classification

Emergency Contraceptive Pills
Intrauterine Devices

Mechanism of Action

Pathophysiology

Causes

Differentiating Emergency contraception from other Diseases

Epidemiology and Demographics

Risk Factors

Natural History, Complications and Prognosis

Cultural Aspects

Diagnosis

History and Symptoms

Physical Examination

Other Imaging Findings

Other Diagnostic Studies

Treatment

Medical Therapy

Surgery

Primary Prevention

Cost-Effectiveness of Therapy

Future or Investigational Therapies

Case Studies

Case #1

Emergency contraception mechanism of action On the Web

Most recent articles

Most cited articles

Review articles

CME Programs

Powerpoint slides

[1]

American Roentgen Ray Society Images of Emergency contraception mechanism of action

All Images
X-rays
Echo & Ultrasound
CT Images
MRI

Ongoing Trials at Clinical Trials.gov

US National Guidelines Clearinghouse

NICE Guidance

FDA onEmergency contraception mechanism of action

CDC on Emergency contraception mechanism of action

contraception mechanism of action in the news

Blogs on Emergency contraception mechanism of action

Directions to Hospitals Treating Emergency contraception

Risk calculators and risk factors for Emergency contraception mechanism of action

Please help WikiDoc by adding more content here. It's easy! Click here to learn about editing.

Editor-In-Chief: C. Michael Gibson, M.S., M.D. [2]

Mechanism of action

A number of studies in the 1970s and 80s concluded that emergency contraception could cause changes in the endometrium[1] that would prevent implantation of an early-stage embryo in the uterus. This research led many pro-life advocates, who believe that pregnancy begins at fertilization, to oppose ECPs as an abortifacient.

In recent years--especially in light of U.S. ethical controversy over the research's claims--the scientific community has begun to critically reevaluate the early studies, introducing doubt into the argument that ECPs prevent implantation. Recent studies in rats and monkeys have shown that post-ovulatory use of progestin-only and combined ECPs have no effect on pregnancy rates.[2] Studies in humans have shown that the rate of ovulation suppression is approximately equal to the effectiveness of emergency contraceptive pills,[3][4] suggesting that might be the only mechanism by which they prevent pregnancy.

However, these studies have also shown that, in women who ovulate despite taking ECP before ovulation, there are changes in certain hormones such as progesterone and in the length of luteal phase.[3] These secondary changes might inhibit implantation in cases where fertilization occurs despite ECP use. Because of the difficulty of studying embryos inside the uterus and fallopian tubes prior to implantation, both sides of this debate concede that completely proving or disproving the theory may be impossible.

The Food and Drug Administration recently stopped its practice of referring to all three mechanisms in its publications on emergency contraception.

When used as a regular method of contraception, IUDs have been proven to act primarily through spermicidal and ovicidal mechanisms, but it is considered possible that these same mechanisms are also harmful to embryos that have not yet implanted.

Hormonal progestin-only and combined estrogen-progestin emergency contraceptives such as Yuzpe regimen or Plan B are different from the anti-hormonal drugmifepristone (also known as Mifeprex and RU-486), an abortifacient which can induce abortion if taken after implantation. Yuzpe and progestin-only emergency contraception will have no effect if taken after implantation.

References

  1. Ling WY, Robichaud A, Zayid I, Wrixon W, MacLeod SC (1983). "Mode of action of dl-norgestrel and ethinylestradiol combination in postcoital contraception". Fertil Steril. 40 (5): 631–6. PMID 6628707.
    Kubba AA, White JO, Guillebaud J, Elder MG (1986). "The biochemistry of human endometrium after two regimens of postcoital contraception: a dl-norgestrel/ethinylestradiol combination or danazol". Fertil Steril. 45 (4): 512–516. PMID 3956767.
    Yuzpe AA, Thurlow HJ, Ramzy I, Leyshon JI (1974). "Post coital contraception—a pilot study". J Reprod Med. 13 (2): 53–8. PMID 4844513.
  2. Ortiz ME, Ortiz RE, Fuentes MA, Parraguez VH, Croxatto HB (June 2004). "Post-coital administration of levonorgestrel does not interfere with post-fertilization events in the new-world monkey Cebus apella". Human Reproduction. European Society of Human Reproduction and Embryology. 19 (6): 1352–1356. Retrieved 2007-04-11.
  3. 3.0 3.1 Durand M, del Carmen Cravioto M, Raymond EG, Duran-Sanchez O, De la Luz Cruz-Hinojosa M, Castell-Rodriguez A, Schiavon R, Larrea F (2001). "On the mechanisms of action of short-term levonorgestrel administration in emergency contraception". Contraception. 64 (4): 227–34. PMID 11747872.
  4. Croxatto HB, Brache V, Pavez M, Cochon L, Forcelledo ML, Alvarez F, Massai R, Faundes A, Salvatierra AM (December 2004). "Pituitary-ovarian function following the standard levonorgestrel emergency contraceptive dose or a single 0.75-mg dose given on the days preceding ovulation". Contraception. 70 (6): 442–450. PMID 15541405.

Template:WikiDoc Sources