Intravenous Versus Oral Iron Supplementation for the Treatment of Anemia in CKD: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Daniel Shepshelovich*, Benaya Rozen-Zvi, Tomer Avni, Uzi Gafter, Anat Gafter-Gvili

*Corresponding author for this work

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Abstract

Background Iron supplementation is crucial for the treatment of anemia of chronic kidney disease (CKD). Although intravenous (IV) iron is preferred for patients with CKD receiving dialysis (CKD stage 5D), the method of iron replacement for patients with CKD stages 3 to 5 is controversial. Study Design Systematic review and meta-analysis. A search was performed until October 2015 of MEDLINE, Cochrane Library, conference proceedings in nephrology, and reference lists of included trials. Setting & Population Patients with CKD stages 3 to 5 or 5D. Selection Criteria for Studies All randomized controlled trials, regardless of publication status or language. Intervention IV versus oral iron supplementation. Outcomes The primary outcome was defined as percentage of patients reaching an elevation in hemoglobin (Hb) concentration > 1 g/dL. Secondary end points included percentage of patients who reached Hb levels > 11 g/dL, absolute Hb concentration, change in Hb concentration, transferrin saturation, ferritin levels, erythropoiesis-stimulating agents and blood transfusion requirement, and quality of life. Safety analysis included all-cause mortality and serious and all adverse events. Results 24 trials were identified, 13 including 2,369 patients with CKD stages 3 to 5 and 11 including 818 patients with CKD stage 5D. Patients treated with IV iron were more likely to reach an Hb response > 1 g/dL (risk ratios [RRs] of 1.61 [95% CI, 1.39-1.87] for CKD stages 3-5 and 2.14 [95% CI, 1.68-2.72] for CKD stage 5D). Safety analysis showed similar rates of mortality and serious and any adverse effects. IV iron replacement was associated with higher risk for hypotension (RR, 3.71; 95% CI, 1.74-7.94) and fewer gastrointestinal adverse events (RR, 0.43; 95% CI, 0.28-0.67). Limitations Significant heterogeneity between trials; follow-up was usually limited to 3 months. Conclusions Our results agree with current recommendations for IV iron replacement for patients with CKD stage 5D and support increased use of IV iron for patients with CKD stages 3 to 5.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)677-690
Number of pages14
JournalAmerican Journal of Kidney Diseases
Volume68
Issue number5
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 Nov 2016

Keywords

  • Hb response
  • IV iron
  • Iron
  • anemia
  • blood transfusion
  • chronic kidney disease (CKD)
  • cideferron
  • dialysis
  • end-stage renal disease (ESRD)
  • erythropoiesis-stimulating agent (ESA)
  • ferric carboxymaltose
  • ferric gluconate
  • ferritin
  • ferumoxytol
  • haemoglobin
  • iron dextran
  • iron sucrose
  • iron supplementation
  • isomaltoside
  • oral iron
  • quality of life
  • safety
  • systematic review
  • transferrin saturation (TSAT)

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'Intravenous Versus Oral Iron Supplementation for the Treatment of Anemia in CKD: An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-analysis'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this