Display Settings:

Format

Send to:

Choose Destination
Am J Kidney Dis. 2008 Nov;52(5):897-906. doi: 10.1053/j.ajkd.2008.05.033. Epub 2008 Oct 8.

Intravenous versus oral iron supplementation for the treatment of anemia in CKD: systematic review and meta-analysis.

Author information

  • 1Department of Nephrology and Hypertension, Rabin Medical Center, Beilinson Hospital, Petah-Tikva, and Sackler School of Medicine, Tel Aviv University, Tel-Aviv, Israel. benayarz@gmail.com

Abstract

BACKGROUND:

Iron supplementation is essential for the treatment of patients with anemia of chronic kidney disease (CKD). It is not clear which is the best method of iron administration.

STUDY DESIGN:

Systematic review and meta-analysis. A search was performed until January 2008 of MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, conference proceedings in nephrology, and reference lists of included trials.

SETTING & POPULATION:

Patients with CKD (stages III to V). We included dialysis patients and patients with CKD not on dialysis therapy (hereafter referred to as patients with CKD).

SELECTION CRITERIA FOR STUDIES:

We included all randomized controlled trials regardless of publication status or language.

INTERVENTION:

Intravenous (IV) versus oral iron supplementation.

OUTCOMES MEASURES:

Primary outcomes assessed: absolute hemoglobin (Hb) level or change in Hb level from baseline. We also assessed all-cause mortality, erythropoiesis-stimulating agent requirement, adverse events, ferritin level, and need for renal replacement therapy in patients with CKD.

RESULTS:

13 trials were identified, 6 including patients with CKD and 7 including dialysis patients. Compared with oral iron, there was a significantly greater Hb level in dialysis patients treated with IV iron (weighted mean difference, 0.83 g/dL; 95% confidence interval, 0.09 to 1.57). Meta-regression showed a positive association between Hb level increase and IV iron dose administered and a negative association with baseline Hb level. For patients with CKD, there was a small but significant difference in Hb level favoring the IV iron group (weighted mean difference, 0. 31 g/dL; 95% confidence interval, 0.09 to 0. 53). Data for all-cause mortality were sparse, and there was no difference in adverse events between the IV- and oral-treated patients.

LIMITATIONS:

There was significant heterogeneity between trials. Follow-up was limited to 2 to 3 months.

CONCLUSIONS:

Our review shows that patients on hemodialysis therapy have better Hb level response when treated with IV iron. For patients with CKD, this effect is small.

PMID:
18845368
[PubMed - indexed for MEDLINE]
PubMed Commons home

PubMed Commons

0 comments
How to join PubMed Commons

    Supplemental Content

    Full text links

    Icon for Elsevier Science Icon for PubMed Health
    Loading ...
    Write to the Help Desk