Can combined Oral Contraceptive Pills (OCPs) be prescribed to a patient with a history of pre-eclampsia?

Medical Advisory BoardAll articles are reviewed for accuracy by our Medical Advisory Board
Educational purpose only • Exercise caution as content is pending human review
Article Review Status
Submitted
Under Review
Approved

Last updated: December 8, 2025View editorial policy

Personalize

Help us tailor your experience

Which best describes you? Your choice helps us use language that's most understandable for you.

Combined OCPs Should NOT Be Prescribed to This Patient

A 22-year-old woman with a history of pre-eclampsia 2 years ago should not receive combined oral contraceptive pills due to substantially elevated cardiovascular risks—specifically a 2-fold or greater increased risk of stroke and ischemic heart disease, and a 4-fold increased risk of heart failure associated with her pre-eclampsia history, which is further compounded by the 1.5-1.9-fold increased stroke and ischemic heart disease risk from COCs themselves. 1

Why Combined OCPs Are Contraindicated

Cardiovascular Risk from Pre-eclampsia History

  • Pre-eclampsia alone confers major long-term cardiovascular risks: Women with a history of pre-eclampsia have a 2-fold or greater increased risk of both ischemic heart disease and stroke, and a 4-fold increased risk of heart failure compared to women without this history. 1

  • These risks persist years after the pregnancy and represent permanent vascular endothelial dysfunction that does not resolve. 1

Additive Risk from Combined OCPs

  • Current use of combined oral contraceptives independently increases cardiovascular risk: COCs are associated with a 1.5-1.9-fold increased risk of both ischemic stroke and ischemic heart disease. 1

  • The relative risk of myocardial infarction with COC use is 1.6-1.7, and for ischemic stroke is 1.7-1.9. 1

  • These risks are multiplicative, not simply additive: When a woman with pre-eclampsia history uses COCs, she faces compounded thrombotic risk from both her underlying vascular pathology and the prothrombotic effects of exogenous estrogen. 2, 3

Venous Thromboembolism Risk

  • COCs increase venous thromboembolism (VTE) risk approximately 4-fold overall, with the highest risk (OR 4.17) occurring in the first year of use. 2

  • Second-generation COCs (containing levonorgestrel or norethisterone) have lower VTE risk than third-generation formulations (containing desogestrel, gestodene) or fourth-generation formulations (containing drospirenone), with pooled risk ratios of 1.5-2.0 comparing newer progestogens to levonorgestrel. 4, 5

Recommended Alternative: Progestogen-Only Contraceptives

Progestogen-only contraceptives (POCs) are the appropriate choice for this patient and should be strongly recommended. 2, 3

Why POCs Are Safe in This Population

  • No increased cardiovascular risk: Progestogen-only contraceptives show no association with myocardial infarction or stroke, with risk ratios of 0.98-1.02 (essentially no increased risk). 1, 6

  • No significant VTE risk increase: POCs do not significantly increase venous thromboembolism risk, unlike combined formulations. 2, 4

  • No blood pressure elevation: POCs do not significantly affect blood pressure, avoiding the hypertensive effects sometimes seen with estrogen-containing formulations. 6

Specific POC Options

  • Progestogen-only pills (POPs): Daily oral pills containing only progestogen (desogestrel 75 mcg or norethindrone 0.35 mg). 6

  • Long-acting reversible contraceptives (LARCs): Levonorgestrel IUD, etonogestrel implant, or depot medroxyprogesterone acetate injection—all progestogen-only methods with superior efficacy and no estrogen-related cardiovascular risk. 2

Critical Clinical Pitfalls to Avoid

  • Do not assume that 2 years post-pregnancy makes COCs safe: The cardiovascular risk from pre-eclampsia persists indefinitely and does not diminish significantly with time since the affected pregnancy. 1

  • Do not prescribe COCs even if the patient has no other risk factors: Pre-eclampsia history alone is sufficient to contraindicate estrogen-containing contraception due to the multiplicative thrombotic risk. 2, 3

  • Do not use "low-dose" COCs as a compromise: Even low-dose formulations (≤35 mcg ethinyl estradiol) carry the same relative cardiovascular risk increases in women with pre-eclampsia history. 2, 5

  • Blood pressure must be monitored: If the patient has residual hypertension from her pre-eclampsia (which occurs in some cases), this would further amplify COC-related cardiovascular risk by approximately 3-fold for MI and ischemic stroke. 2

Counseling Points for This Patient

  • Explain that her pre-eclampsia history indicates underlying vascular changes that permanently increase her cardiovascular risk, making estrogen-containing contraception unsafe. 1

  • Emphasize that progestogen-only methods provide equally effective contraception without the cardiovascular risks of combined methods. 2

  • Discuss that LARCs offer superior typical-use efficacy (>99%) compared to daily pills and eliminate adherence concerns. 2

  • Counsel that condoms should be used consistently for STI protection regardless of hormonal contraceptive choice. 7

References

Guideline

Guideline Directed Topic Overview

Dr.Oracle Medical Advisory Board & Editors, 2025

Research

Cardiovascular risk and the use of oral contraceptives.

Neuro endocrinology letters, 2013

Research

Thrombotic risks of oral contraceptives.

Current opinion in obstetrics & gynecology, 2012

Research

A systematic review and meta-analysis of venous thrombosis risk among users of combined oral contraception.

International journal of gynaecology and obstetrics: the official organ of the International Federation of Gynaecology and Obstetrics, 2018

Guideline

Combined Oral Contraceptive Pills with Testosterone Therapy

Praxis Medical Insights: Practical Summaries of Clinical Guidelines, 2025

Guideline

COCP Selection for Patients on Klonopin and Adderall

Praxis Medical Insights: Practical Summaries of Clinical Guidelines, 2025

Professional Medical Disclaimer

This information is intended for healthcare professionals. Any medical decision-making should rely on clinical judgment and independently verified information. The content provided herein does not replace professional discretion and should be considered supplementary to established clinical guidelines. Healthcare providers should verify all information against primary literature and current practice standards before application in patient care. Dr.Oracle assumes no liability for clinical decisions based on this content.

Have a follow-up question?

Our Medical A.I. is used by practicing medical doctors at top research institutions around the world. Ask any follow up question and get world-class guideline-backed answers instantly.