Nonlatex vs. latex male condoms for contraception: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.
This systematic review sought to evaluate nonlatex male condoms in comparison with latex condoms in terms of contraceptive efficacy, breakage, slippage, safety and user preferences. We searched computerized databases and contacted manufactures and investigators to find randomized controlled trials of nonlatex vs. latex male condoms. Two reviewers independently abstracted data from the 10 identified trials. While the eZ. on condom did not protect against pregnancy as well as its latex comparison condom, no differences were found in typical-use efficacy between the Avanti and the Standard Tactylon and their latex counterparts. Nonlatex condoms were associated with higher rates of clinical breakage than their latex comparisons, with statistically significant odds ratios of clinical breakage ranging from 2.6 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.6-4.3) to 5.0 (95% CI: 3.6-6.8). Few adverse events were reported. Substantial proportions of participants reported preferences for the nonlatex condoms. Despite higher rates of clinical breakage, nonlatex condoms still provide an acceptable alternative for those with allergies, sensitivities or preferences that might prevent the consistent use of latex condoms. The contraceptive efficacy of nonlatex condoms requires more research.[1]References
- Nonlatex vs. latex male condoms for contraception: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials. Gallo, M.F., Grimes, D.A., Schulz, K.F. Contraception. (2003) [Pubmed]
Annotations and hyperlinks in this abstract are from individual authors of WikiGenes or automatically generated by the WikiGenes Data Mining Engine. The abstract is from MEDLINE®/PubMed®, a database of the U.S. National Library of Medicine.About WikiGenesOpen Access LicencePrivacy PolicyTerms of Useapsburg
