We found high quality evidence that hormone therapy in both primary and secondary prevention conferred no protective effects for all-cause mortality , cardiovascular death , non-fatal myocardial infa rct ion , angina , or revascularisation .
There was no strong evidence of effect on risk of stroke in this group .
Our review findings provide strong evidence that treatment with hormone therapy in post-menopausal women overall , for either primary or secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease events has little if any benefit and causes an increase in the risk of stroke and venous thromboembolic events
BACKGROUND Evidence from systematic review s of observational studies suggests that hormone therapy may have beneficial effects in reducing the incidence of cardiovascular disease events in post-menopausal women , however the results of r and omised controlled trials ( RCTs ) have had mixed results .
This is an up date d version of a Cochrane review published in 2013 .
OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of hormone therapy for the prevention of cardiovascular disease in post-menopausal women , and whether there are differential effects between use in primary or secondary prevention .
Secondary aims were to undertake exploratory analyses to ( i ) assess the impact of time since menopause that treatment was commenced ( ≥ 10 years versus < 10 years ) , and where these data were not available , use age of trial participants at baseline as a proxy ( ≥ 60 years of age versus < 60 years of age ) ; and ( ii ) assess the effects of length of time on treatment .
The Women's Health Initiative postmenopausal hormone trials: overview and baseline characteristics of participants.
The postmenopausal hormone therapy ( PHT ) component of the Women ’s Health Initiative ( WHI ) is composed of two r and omized , placebo-controlled , double-blind trials in postmenopausal women aged 50 to 79 years at initial screening , testing the effects of estrogen alone ( E-alone ) and estrogen plus progestin ( E P ) on coronary heart disease ( CHD ) as the primary outcome , hip and other fractures and colorectal cancer as secondary outcomes , and pulmonary embolism , breast and endometrial cancers as potential risks . The design and rationale of the PHT trials , including general eligibility and exclusion criteria and considerations regarding sample size and statistical power , have been described previously ( 1 ) . Postmenopausal hormones have been initiated in menopausal women for the treatment of vasomotor symptoms , mood disturbances , vaginal dryness , and prevention of rapid bone loss for several decades . Despite a paucity of data on effects of initiating hormone use in older women , postmenopausal hormones have also been promoted for the prevention of CHD , osteoporotic fractures , and other diseases that occur years after menopause ( 2 ) . It is generally recommended ( 2 ) that women with a uterus be prescribed a combination of estrogen and progestin to prevent
We found high quality evidence that hormone therapy in both primary and secondary prevention conferred no protective effects for all-cause mortality , cardiovascular death , non-fatal myocardial infa rct ion , angina , or revascularisation .
There was no strong evidence of effect on risk of stroke in this group .
Our review findings provide strong evidence that treatment with hormone therapy in post-menopausal women overall , for either primary or secondary prevention of cardiovascular disease events has little if any benefit and causes an increase in the risk of stroke and venous thromboembolic events
BACKGROUND Evidence from systematic review s of observational studies suggests that hormone therapy may have beneficial effects in reducing the incidence of cardiovascular disease events in post-menopausal women , however the results of r and omised controlled trials ( RCTs ) have had mixed results .
This is an up date d version of a Cochrane review published in 2013 .
OBJECTIVES To assess the effects of hormone therapy for the prevention of cardiovascular disease in post-menopausal women , and whether there are differential effects between use in primary or secondary prevention .
Secondary aims were to undertake exploratory analyses to ( i ) assess the impact of time since menopause that treatment was commenced ( ≥ 10 years versus < 10 years ) , and where these data were not available , use age of trial participants at baseline as a proxy ( ≥ 60 years of age versus < 60 years of age ) ; and ( ii ) assess the effects of length of time on treatment .