Uterine fibroids are the most common gynecological disorder, classically requiring surgery when symptomatic. Although attempts at finding a nonsurgical cure date back to centuries, it is only around the middle of the last century that serious attempts at a medical treatment were carried out. Initially, both progestins and estrogen–progestin combinations have been utilized, although proof of their usefulness is lacking. A major step forward was achieved when peptide analogs of the GnRH were introduced, first those with superagonist properties and subsequently those acting as antagonists. Initially, the latter produced side effects preventing their routine utilization; eventually, this problem was overcome following the synthesis of cetrorelix. Because both types of analogs produce hypoestrogenism, their use is limited to a maximum of 6 months and, for this reason, today they are utilized as an adjuvant treatment before surgery with overall good results. Over the last decade, new, nonpeptidic, orally active GnRH-receptor blockers have also been synthesized. One of them, Elagolix, is in the early stages of testing in women with fibroids. Another fundamental development has been the utilization of the so-called selective progesterone receptor modulators, sometimes referred to as “antiprogestins”. The first such compound to be applied to the long-term treatment of fibroids was Mifepristone; today, this compound is mostly used outside of Western Countries, where the substance of choice is Ulipristal acetate. Large clinical trials have proven the effectiveness of Ulipristal in the long-term medical therapy of fibroids, although some caution must be exercised because of the rare occurrence of liver complications. All selective progesterone receptor modulators produce unique endometrial changes that are today considered benign, reversible, and without negative consequences. In conclusion, long-term medical treatment of fibroids seems possible today, especially in premenopausal women.

The risk-benefit profile of any pharmacologic agent must be evaluated against risks connected with the events to be avoided. This is especially true in the case of hormonal contraception, not intended to combat a disease. Over the six decades during which their use has progressively expanded, the risk-benefit profile of combined oral contraceptives (COC) has substantially changed, with new combinations, dosages and mode of administration appearing on the market. Area covered: In a series of articles, recent information on the complex issue of COC risks and benefits will be reviewed in the hope of providing an updated picture. The present article reviews metabolic changes occurring during use of modern combinations of estrogens (ethinyl estradiol, estradiol, estradiol valerate and estetrol) and new progestins (desogestrel, gestodene, dienogest, drospirenone, nomegestrol acetate), often compared to classic compounds, such as levonorgestrel. Three categories of metabolic effects in healthy women are detailed: on carbohydrates, lipid and bone mineral content. Expert commentary: Overall, the picture is reassuring: the new generations of progestins are basically devoid of androgenic, estrogenic or glucocorticoid related side-effects. This should result in an improved safety profile, although past history teaches us that that large comparative and surveillance studies are required before firm conclusions can be drawn. At any rate, available evidence indicates that metabolic effects of third and fourth generation progestins, especially when they are combined with natural estrogens, are minimal and, if used in healthy women, should not cause concern.

Introduction: Following a historical overview, the effect of different contraceptive methods on vaginal microbiome has been reviewed and summarized. Areas covered: Effects of combined hormonal contraceptives (oral or vaginal) and of progestin only (injectable and implantable), intrauterine devices/systems (copper- or levonorgestrel-releasing), on vaginal microbiome. In addition, mention is made of vaginal rings releasing antiviral drugs and lactic acid. Expert opinion: The vaginal microbiota (VM) is unique in that it is normally dominated by Lactobacillus species providing a degree of protection against infections; this however may vary, depending on the species and strains of Lactobacillus. Bacterial Vaginosis represents the most common dysbiosis of the VM and its prevalence can be influenced by use of contraception. Available evidence indicates that, under the influence of oral or systemically administered female sex hormones, there is apromotion of vaginal eubiosis, with aprevalence of ahealthy VM in which Lactobacilli predominate.

Purpose: The Italian Society of Contraception identified as one of its priorities the need to give recommendations on management of contraception during Coronavirus-Covid 19 pandemia Materials and methods: A concise communication was produced which summarises in an easy-to-read format suitable for clinicians the management of the different contraceptives mostly used. Information how to manage contraception in different conditions is presented. Results: Women may, in general, continue to use either intrauterine and or hormonal contraceptives. The use of condom should be added to any hormonal contraceptive, when the contraceptive efficacy is reduced or when women stop the contraceptive method. Conclusion: At the present time, during the Coronavirus-Covid 19 pandemia, no data contraindicate the use of intrauterine or hormonal contraceptives. Conversely the use of an appropriate contraception is advocate to prevent unintended pregnancies.

Introduction: The pharmacodynamic effects of various combined oral estrogen-progestin combinations (COC) are examined for their components alone or in the various combined formulations. Special emphasis is given to products containing natural estrogens. Areas covered: Recent information on the effect of androgens, estrogens, progestins, as well as various COC combinations on the coagulation cascade will be reviewed aiming at providing an updated picture. The present article reviews hemostatic changes occurring during use of classic and modern combinations of estrogens (ethinyl estradiol, estradiol, estradiol valerate and estetrol) and new progestins (desogestrel, gestodene, dienogest, drospirenone, nomegestrol acetate), compared to classic compounds, such as levonorgestrel. Both pro- and anti-coagulatory effects of COC in healthy women are detailed and possible links with incidence of thromboembolic events are discussed. Expert commentary: Overall, the picture is reassuring: the use of natural estrogens and of new generation progestins has reduced pro-coagulatory changes in healthy subjects, although the observed differences in the risk of venous thromboembolism between second and third generation progestins is still incompletely understood. At the same time, there still is a need for large comparative and surveillance studies before firm conclusions can be drawn. At any rate, available evidence indicates that hemostatic effects of the newer COC, especially those utilizing natural estrogens, are minimal and often remain with the normal range.

SUMMARY Ulipristal acetate (UPA) is now recommended as first choice hormonal Emergency Contraception (EC), due to its higher efficacy and similar safety compared to Levonogestrel - EC. Even though all trials demonstrated that the first mechanism of action is inhibition of ovulation, some authors still postulate that a post fertilization effect is also possible, raising the alert on medication and fostering the ethical debate. A Medline database search was performed in order to find recent articles related to UPA’s effects on ovulation, on fallopian tube and on endometrium. We also analyzed the effects on sperm function and pregnancy. All studies conclude that UPA is effective in inhibition of ovulation even when administered shortly before LH peak. The effects on fallopian tube are unclear: according to some authors UPA inhibits ciliar beat through an agonistic effect on progesterone receptors, according to others it antagonizes the progesterone-induced ciliar beat decrease. Concerning the action on endometrium and on embryo implantation most of the studies concluded that low dose UPA used for EC has no significant effect on the decrease of endometrial thickness and on embryo’s attachment, but these results are still matter of debate. Finally recent evidence suggests that UPA modulates human sperm functions while it has no effect on established pregnancy. To date the majority of the evidence concur in excluding a post-fertilization effect of UPA, even though more studies are needed to clarify its mechanism of action.