Laboratorios Bagó > Referencias > CIR 520
1) Novák A. et al. The combined contraceptive vaginal ring, an international study of user acceptability. Contraception. 2003 Mar;67(3):187-94.
2) Alexander NJ. et al. Why consider vaginal drug administration? Fertil Steril. 2004 Jul;82(1):1-12.
3) Barnhart KT. et al. In vivo assessment of vaginal ring placement. Contraception. 2005 Sep;72(3):196-9.
4) Datos en archivo MSD.
5) Van der Huevel MW, van Bragt AJM, Alnabawy AKM, Kaptein MCJ. Comparison of ethinylestradiol pharmacokinetics in three hormonal contraceptive formulations: the vaginal ring, the transdermal patch and an oral contraceptive. Contraception. 2005;72(3):168-174.
6) Timmer CJ,Mulders TMT. Pharmacokinetics of etonogestrel and ethinylestradiol released from combined contraceptive ring. Clin Pharmacokinet 2000; 39(3):233-242.
7) Cicinelli E. Intravaginal oestrogen and progestin administration: advantages and disadvantages. Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol. 2008;22(2):391-405.
8) Ahrendt HJ. et al. Efficacy, acceptability and tolerability of the combined contraceptive ring, compared with an oral contraceptive containing 30 microg of ethinyl estradiol and 3 mg of drospirenone. Contraception. 2006 Dec;74(6):451-7.
9) Dieben TO. et al. Efficacy, cycle control, and user acceptability of a novel combined contraceptive vaginal ring. Obstet Gynecol. 2002 Sep;100(3):585-93.
10) Oddsson K. et al. Efficacy and safety of a contraceptive vaginal ring compared with a combined oral contraceptive: a 1-year randomized trial. Contraception. 2005 Mar;71(3):176-82.