Evaluation of menstrual bleeding patterns: a new proposal for a universal guideline based on the analysis of more than 4500 bleeding diaries

References

• Taubert H D, Kuhl H. Kontrazeption mit Hormonen, Ein Leitfaden für die Praxis2nd edn. Georg Thieme Verlag, Stuttgart 1995; 153–161
   Google Scholar
• Rosenberg M J, Long S C. Oral contraceptives and cycle control: a critical review of the literature. Adv Contracept 1992; 8(Suppl 1)35–45
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Roumen F JME, Apter D, Mulders T MT, Dieben T OM. Efficacy, tolerability and acceptability of a novel contraceptive vaginal ring releasing etonogestrel and ethinyl oestradiol. Hum Reprod 2001; 16: 469–475
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Roumen F. Contraceptive efficacy and tolerability with a novel combined contraceptive vaginal ring, NuvaRing. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2002; 7(Suppl 2)19–24
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Roumen F JME, op ten Berg M MT, Hoomans E HM. The combined contraceptive vaginal ring (NuvaRing®): first experience in daily clinical practice in the Netherlands. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2006; 11: 14–22
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Archer D, Raine T, Darney P, Alexander N J. An open-label noncomparative study to evaluate the vagina and cervix of NuvaRing® users [Abstract O-65]. Fertil Steril 2002; 78(Suppl 1)S25
   Google Scholar
• Oddsson K, Leifels Fischer B, et al. Efficacy and safety of a contraceptive vaginal ring (NuvaRing) compared with a combined oral contraceptive: a 1-year randomized trial. Contraception 2005; 71: 176–182
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Archer D F, Cullins V, Creasy G W, Fisher A C. The impact of improved compliance with a weekly contraceptive transdermal system (Ortho Evra) on contraceptive efficacy. Contraception 2004; 69: 189–195
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Heger-Mahn D, Warlimont C, Faustmann T, et al. Combined ethinylestradiol/gestodene contraceptive patch: two-center, open-label study of ovulation inhibition, acceptability and safety over two cycles in female volunteers. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2004; 9: 173–181
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ladipo O A, Akinso S A. Contraceptive implants. Afr J Reprod Health 2005; 9: 16–23
   PubMedGoogle Scholar
• Luukkainen T, Allonen H, Haukkamaa M, et al. Five years' experience with levonorgestrel-releasing IUDs. Contraception 1986; 33: 139–148
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Andersson K. The levonorgestrel intrauterine system: more than a contraceptive. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2001; 6(Suppl 1)15–22
   Google Scholar
• Sivin I, Stern J, Coutinho E, et al. Prolonged intrauterine contraception. A seven-year randomized study of the levonorgestrel 20 mcg/day (LNg20) and the copper T380Ag IUDs. Contraception 1991; 44: 473–480
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Draper B H, Morroni C, Hoffman M, et al. Depot medroxyprogesterone versus norethisterone oenanthate for long-acting progestogenic contraception. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2006; 19(3), CD005214
   Google Scholar
• Ortiz M E, Croxatto H B. The mode of action of IUDs. Contraception 1987; 36: 37–53
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Batár I. State-of-the-art of intrauterine contraception. Eur J Contracept Reprod Health Care 2006; 11: 262–269
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sulak P J, Scow R D, Preece C, et al. Hormone withdrawal symptoms in oral contraceptive users. Obstet Gynecol 2000; 95: 261–266
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wiegratz I, Hommel H H, Zimmermann T, Kuhl H. Attitude of German women and gynecologists towards long-cycle treatment with oral contraceptives. Contraception 2004; 69: 37–42
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Endrikat J, Cronin M, Gerlinger C, et al. Double-blind, multicenter comparison of efficacy, cycle control, and tolerability of a 23-day vs. a 21-day low-dose oral contraceptive regimen containing 20 μg ethinylestradiol and 75 μg gestodene. Contraception 2001; 64: 99–105
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Sullivan H, Furniss H, Spona J, Elstein M. Effect of 21-day and 24-day oral contraceptive regimens containing gestodene (60 microg) and ethinyl estradiol (15 microg) on ovarian activity. Fertil Steril 1999; 72: 115–120
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• YAZ® US label, Available at: http://www.fda.gov/cder/foi/label/2006/021676s000lbl.pdf (accessed 3 June 2007)
   Google Scholar
• Anderson F D, Hait H. A multicenter, randomized study of an extended cycle oral contraceptive. Contraception 2003; 68: 89–96
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• The European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products, Committee for Proprietary Medicinal Products (CPMP). Note for Guidance on Clinical Evaluation of Steroid Contraceptives in Women. CPMP, London 2000, CPMP/EWP/519/98, Section 4.3
   Google Scholar
• The European Agency for the Evaluation of Medicinal Products, Committee for Proprietary Medicinal Products (CPMP). Points to Consider on Hormone Replacement Therapy. CPMP, London 1997, CPMP/EWP/021/97, Section 2.2.2
   Google Scholar
• US Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research (CDER). Guidance for Industry. Labeling for Combined Oral Contraceptives Revision 1, Available at: http://www.fda.gov/cder/guidance/5197dft.pdf (accessed 3 June 2007)
   Google Scholar
• URL. Available at: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?DB=pubmed (accessed 3 June 2007)
   Google Scholar
• World Health Organization Special Programme of Research, Development and Research Training in Human Reproduction. The analysis of vaginal bleeding patterns induced by fertility regulating methods. Contraception 1986; 34: 253–260
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gerlinger C. Entwicklung zweier methodologischer Leitlinien zur Beurteilung von Blutungsmustern – Eine Hilfe für Zulassung und Verschreibung auf der Basis einer empirischen Analyse. Universität Berlin, 2005 Dissertation, Technische
   Google Scholar
• Endrikat J, Cronin M, Gerlinger C, et al. Open, multicenter comparison of efficacy, cycle control, and tolerability of a 23-day oral contraceptive regimen with 20 microg ethinyl estradiol and 75 microg gestodene and a 21-day regimen with 20 microg ethinyl estradiol and 150 microg desogestrel. Contraception 2001; 64: 201–207
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schindler A E, Christensen B, Henkel A, et al. High-dose pilot study with the novel progestogen dienogest in patients with endometriosis. Gynecol Endocrinol 2006; 22: 9–17
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Archer D F, Pickar J H. The assessment of bleeding patterns in postmenopausal women during continuous combined hormone replacement therapy: a review of methodology and recommendations for reporting of the data. Climacteric 2002; 5: 45–59
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mishell D R, Jr, Guillebaud J, Westhoff C, et al. Recommendations for standardization of data collection and analysis of bleeding in combined hormone contraceptive trials. Contraception 2007; 75: 11–15
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Korver T, Klipping C, Heger-Mahn D, et al. Maintenance of ovulation inhibition with the 75-microg desogestrel-only contraceptive pill (Cerazette) after scheduled 12-h delays in tablet intake. Contraception 2005; 71: 8–13
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vasilenko P, Kraicer P F, Kaplan R, et al. A new and simple method of measuring menstrual blood loss. J Reprod Med 1988; 33: 293–297
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Seasonale US label, Available at: http://www.fda.gov/cder/foi/label/2003/21544_seasonale_lbl.pdf (accessed 3 June 2007)
   Google Scholar
• Mirena US label, Available at: http://www.berlex.com/html/products/pi/Mirena_PI.pdf (accessed 3 June 2007)
   Google Scholar
• Angeliq US Label, Available at: www.fda.gov/cder/foi/label/2005/021355lbl.pdf (accessed 3 June 2007)
   Google Scholar