scholarly journals Long-Term Efficacy of Postpartum Intravenous Iron Therapy

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nadine Becuzzi ◽  
Roland Zimmermann ◽  
Alexander Krafft
Keyword(s):  
Single Injection ◽  
Intravenous Iron ◽  
Oral Iron ◽  
Iron Stores ◽  
Lower Baseline ◽  
Baseline Haemoglobin ◽  
Oral Group ◽  
Potential Benefits ◽  
Intravenous Iron Therapy

Background. The potential benefits of administering a dose of intravenous iron in patients with moderate postpartum anaemia rather than oral iron alone remains unproven.Aims.To determine whether a single injection of intravenous iron followed by a 6-week course of oral iron is as effective over 6 months in restoring normal haemoglobin levels and replenishing iron stores in women with moderate postpartum anaemia as a course of oral iron alone in women with mild postpartum anaemia.Materials and Methods. Retrospective two-arm cohort study in women with mild postpartum anaemia (haemoglobin 9.6–10.5 g/dL) prescribed iron daily for 6 weeks (N=150) and women with moderate postpartum anaemia (haemoglobin 8.5–9.5 g/dL), given a single 500 mg injection of intravenous iron followed by iron daily for 6 weeks (N=75). Haemoglobin and ferritin were measured 6 months postpartum.Results. Haemoglobin returned to similar mean levels in both groups. Ferritin levels were statistically significantly higher in the intravenous + oral group (57.7±49.3 μg/L versus32.9±20.1 μg/L).Conclusions.Despite lower baseline haemoglobin, intravenous iron carboxymaltose was superior to oral iron alone in replenishing iron stores in moderate postpartum anaemia and may prove similarly beneficial in mild postpartum anaemia.

scholarly journals Can oral iron tablets be replaced by the intravenous iron sucrose in antenatal period? A new thought.

2018 ◽  
Vol 7 (8) ◽  
pp. 3103
Author(s):  
Snehal S. Tate ◽  
Arti S. Shirsath ◽  
Neelesh S. Risbud
Keyword(s):  
Iron Deficiency ◽  
Iron Deficiency Anaemia ◽  
Intravenous Iron ◽  
Oral Iron ◽  
Iron Sucrose ◽  
Iron Therapy ◽  
Deficiency Anaemia ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Oral Group ◽  
Intravenous Iron Therapy

Background: Anaemia is the commonest medical disorder that contributes significantly to maternal morbidity and mortality, preterm delivery, intrauterine growth restriction. Pregnant women are particularly vulnerable to anaemia because they have dual iron requirements both for their growth and growth of foetus. A high proportion of women in both industrialized and developing countries become anaemic during pregnancy. Intravenous iron therapy is safe convenient and effective than oral iron therapy in prevention of iron deficiency anaemia when compliance is the problem. The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy, safety and acceptability of intravenous iron Vs oral iron in prevention of iron deficiency anaemia during pregnancy. The objective of the present research was to study the efficacy, safety and acceptability of oral iron (ferrous fumarate) versus intravenous iron (iron sucrose) for the prevention of iron deficiency anaemia during pregnancy.Methods: It was a prospective comparative case control study without blinding including 400 registered antenatal women in SKNMC and GH, Narhe, Pune. Results were based on collection and analysis of data from samples within study population.Results: There was no significant difference in mean haemoglobin rise between oral group and IV group but there is significant difference between mean ferritin levels between oral group and IV group. In IV group ferritin levels at 36 weeks were almost 1.8 times more than oral group. Acceptability and convenience of IV iron was significantly more than oral iron.Conclusions: Intravenous iron therapy in the form of three divided doses, one in each trimester can be safely used in the antenatal woman as an alternative to prophylactic iron tablets for prevention of iron deficiency anaemia especially in women who are non-compliant or does not tolerate oral iron tablets.

Oral versus Intravenous Iron Supplementation in Peritoneal Dialysis Patients

2001 ◽  
Vol 21 (3_suppl) ◽  
pp. 231-235 ◽  
Author(s):  
David W. Johnson ◽  
Karen A. Herzig ◽  
Ruth Gissane ◽  
Scott B. Campbell ◽  
Carmel M. Hawley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Peritoneal Dialysis ◽  
Iron Supplementation ◽  
Intravenous Iron ◽  
Oral Iron ◽  
Iron Therapy ◽  
Safe Alternative ◽  
Iron Stores ◽  
Iron Deficient ◽  
Intravenous Iron Therapy ◽  
Intravenous Iron Supplementation

The vast majority of erythropoietin (EPO)–treated peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients require iron supplementation. Most authors and clinical practice guidelines recommend primary oral iron supplementation in PD patients because it is more practical and less expensive. However, numerous studies have clearly demonstrated that oral iron therapy is unable to maintain EPO-treated PD patients in positive iron balance. Once patients become iron-deficient, intravenous iron administration has been found to more effectively augment iron stores and hematologic response than does oral therapy. We recently performed a prospective, cross-over trial in 28 iron-replete PD patients and showed that twice-monthly outpatient iron polymaltose infusions (200 mg) were a practical and safe alternative to oral iron. That treatment produced significant increases in hemoglobin concentration and body iron stores. The additional expense of intravenous iron therapy was completely offset by reductions in EPO dosage. Careful monitoring of iron stores is important in patients receiving intravenous iron supplementation in view of epidemiologic links with infection and cardiovascular disease. Nevertheless, a growing body of evidence suggests that, as has been found for hemodialysis patients, intravenous iron therapy is superior to oral iron supplementation in EPO-treated PD patients.

scholarly journals Oral and Intravenous Iron Therapy Differentially Alter the On- and Off-Tumor Microbiota in Anemic Colorectal Cancer Patients

Cancers ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (6) ◽  
pp. 1341
Author(s):  
Oliver Phipps ◽  
Hafid O. Al-Hassi ◽  
Mohammed N. Quraishi ◽  
Edward A. Dickson ◽  
Jonathan Segal ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Colorectal Cancer ◽  
Ferrous Sulphate ◽  
Intravenous Iron ◽  
Oral Iron ◽  
Iron Therapy ◽  
Deficiency Anemia ◽  
Ferric Carboxymaltose ◽  
Β Diversity ◽  
Post Surgery ◽  
Intravenous Iron Therapy

Iron deficiency anemia is a common complication of colorectal cancer and may require iron therapy. Oral iron can increase the iron available to gut bacteria and may alter the colonic microbiota. We performed an intervention study to compare oral and intravenous iron therapy on the colonic tumor-associated (on-tumor) and paired non-tumor-associated adjacent (off-tumor) microbiota. Anemic patients with colorectal adenocarcinoma received either oral ferrous sulphate (n = 16) or intravenous ferric carboxymaltose (n = 24). On- and off-tumor biopsies were obtained post-surgery and microbial profiling was performed using 16S ribosomal RNA analysis. Off-tumor α- and β-diversity were significantly different between iron treatment groups. No differences in on-tumor diversity were observed. Off-tumor microbiota of oral iron-treated patients showed higher abundances of the orders Clostridiales, Cytophagales, and Anaeroplasmatales compared to intravenous iron-treated patients. The on-tumor microbiota was enriched with the orders Lactobacillales and Alteromonadales in the oral and intravenous iron groups, respectively. The on- and off-tumor microbiota associated with intravenous iron-treated patients infers increased abundances of enzymes involved in iron sequestration and anti-inflammatory/oncogenic metabolite production, compared to oral iron-treated patients. Collectively, this suggests that intravenous iron may be a more appropriate therapy to limit adverse microbial outcomes compared to oral iron.

scholarly journals Intravenous infusion of total dose iron is superior to oral iron in treatment of anemia in peritoneal dialysis patients: a single center comparative study.

1998 ◽  
Vol 9 (4) ◽  
pp. 664-668 ◽  
Author(s):  
N Ahsan
Keyword(s):  
Peritoneal Dialysis ◽  
Total Dose ◽  
Intravenous Infusion ◽  
Iron Supplementation ◽  
Transferrin Saturation ◽  
Intravenous Iron ◽  
Outpatient Setting ◽  
Oral Iron ◽  
Human Erythropoietin ◽  
Oral Group

In the treatment of anemia of chronic renal failure, the most common cause of recombinant human erythropoietin (rhEPO) resistance is iron deficiency. In peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients, oral iron therapy is an accepted and convenient method of iron supplementation. The effectiveness of oral iron, however, is limited by many factors, including gastrointestinal side effects and poor gastric absorption. This study prospectively compared the efficacy of single intravenous infusion of total dose iron (ITDI group) given in an outpatient setting with oral iron (oral group) for the treatment of anemia in PD patients. Twenty-five adult stable PD patients with baseline hematocrit 25 to 35% were entered into the study. Thirteen patients with serum transferrin saturation (TSAT) < 25% received ITDI, and 12 patients with TSAT between 25 and 35% received oral iron. One patient in the oral group received emergent blood transfusion and was excluded from analysis. Hematocrit and iron indices were measured at monthly intervals. Doses of rhEPO were adjusted monthly to maintain target hematocrit at 35%. At the end of the study (6 mo), despite similar baseline mean hematocrit (31.0 +/- 0.9 versus 33.0 +/- 1.0%), comparable mean baseline weekly rhEPO dose (7886 +/- 1449 versus 6370 +/- 1553 U/wk), and significantly lower level of mean TSAT (11.3 +/- 3.5 versus 30.1 +/- 3.5%; P < 0.05), the ITDI group when compared with the oral group had significantly higher mean hematocrit (36.0 +/- 1.0 versus 31.4 +/- 1.1%; P < 0.05) and TSAT (33.7 +/- 3.7 versus 22.6 +/- 4.0%; P < 0.05) values. In addition, the final mean dose of weekly rhEPO was significantly lower in the ITDI group (4799 +/- 981 versus 9998 +/- 1027 U/wk; P < 0.05). No patient in the ITDI group developed an adverse reaction to intravenous iron. It is concluded that ITDI represents a more efficacious method of iron supplementation in PD patients receiving rhEPO. Moreover, ITDI is safe and well tolerated and can be administered in an outpatient setting.

scholarly journals Intravenous Iron Therapy versus Oral Iron in Postpartum Patients in Rural Area

2011 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 67-70 ◽  
Author(s):  
SA Inamdar ◽  
Sunayana Verma
Keyword(s):  
Rural Area ◽  
Ferrous Sulphate ◽  
Intravenous Iron ◽  
Oral Route ◽  
Oral Iron ◽  
Iron Sucrose ◽  
Iron Therapy ◽  
Iron Treatment ◽  
Intravenous Iron Therapy ◽  
The Impact

ABSTRACT Objectives The aim of this study is to evaluate the efficiency and safety of intravenous iron sucrose complex and comparison with oral iron therapy in postpartum period in rural area. Materials and methods It is a prospective, randomized, hospital-based clinical study carried out in over 150 patients, having Hb < 8 mg/dl after 24 hours of delivery. 600 to 800 mg iron sucrose has been given in divided doses, 200 mg on alternate day in 100 ml of normal saline to half of the patients whereas rest of the patients given 200 mg bd dose of ferrous sulphate by oral route for one month. Data was collected after 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th week for the hemoglobin estimation and assessment of the impact of intravenous iron sucrose treatment on the postpartum parameters. Results The mean Hb was significantly increased in the intravenous iron sucrose group in 7 days (7.42 ± 1.04 gm/dl to 9.8 ± 0.76 gm/dl) of treatment but there was no change observed in mean Hb in the patients treated with oral ferrous sulphate. Women treated with intravenous iron sucrose has shown significantly higher Hb on day 7, day 15 and day 30 as compared to the women those were treated with oral iron (p < 0.0001). Conclusion Overall intravenous iron sucrose appears to be an effective mode of treatment in postpartum patients with no serious side effects and associated with faster recovery in shorter duration of hospital stay than oral iron treatment.

scholarly journals Long-Term Prognosis of Hyperferritinemia Induced by Intravenous Iron Therapy in Patients Undergoing Maintenance Hemodialysis: A 10-Year, Single-Center Study

2020 ◽  
Vol 2020 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Sayako Maeda ◽  
Ryo Konishi ◽  
Takuya Morinishi ◽  
Yoko Shimizu ◽  
Haruomi Nishio ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Ferritin Level ◽  
Intravenous Iron ◽  
Hemodialysis Patients ◽  
Iron Therapy ◽  
Maintenance Hemodialysis ◽  
Risk Of Death ◽  
Single Center Study ◽  
Long Term Prognosis ◽  
Intravenous Iron Therapy

Optimal ferritin level in hemodialysis patients between Japan and other countries is controversial. Long-term side effects of iron supplementation in these patients remain unclear. We aimed to elucidate whether past hyperferritinemia in hemodialysis patients was associated with high risk of death and cerebrovascular and cardiovascular diseases (CCVDs). This small retrospective cohort study included approximately 44 patients unintentionally supplemented with excessive intravenous iron. A significantly higher risk of CCVDs was observed in patients with initial serum ferritin levels ≥1000 ng/mL than in the remaining patients. High ferritin levels slowly decreased to <300 ng/mL in a median of 24.2 (10.5–46.5) months without treatment. However, compared with the remaining patients, only patients whose ferritin levels did not decrease to <300 ng/mL steadily had a significantly higher risk of all-cause death (hazard ratio, 9.6). Long-term hyperferritinemia due to intravenous iron therapy is a risk factor for death in maintenance hemodialysis patients. For a prolonged better prognosis, intravenous iron should be carefully administered so as to avoid hyperferritinemia in patients with hemodialysis.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document