4.1 Article

A study for the evaluation of safety and tolerability of intravenous high-dose iron sucrose in patients with iron deficiency anemia due to gastrointestinal bleeding

Journal

ZEITSCHRIFT FUR GASTROENTEROLOGIE
Volume 42, Issue 8, Pages 663-667

Publisher

GEORG THIEME VERLAG KG
DOI: 10.1055/s-2004-813106

Keywords

anemia; inflammatory bowel disease; intravenous iron infusion; iron sucrose; gastrointestinal blood loss

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction: The provision of adequate iron to support erythropoiesis in iron deficient patients is a time-consuming process which may present compliance problems for patients in the outpatient setting. The aim of the present study was to evaluate the safety and tolerability of intravenous high-dose iron sucrose therapy specifically in patients with iron deficiency anemia (IDA) due to gastrointestinal blood loss. Methods: A single dose of iron sucrose of 7 mg iron/kg body weight (not exceeding 500 mg) was infused over 3.5 hours in 31 consecutive patients with IDA due to gastrointestinal blood loss. Safety and tolerability of the therapy was assessed by the occurrence of adverse events under therapy and up to one week after completion of the study. Further examinations comprised vital parameters, ECG, and clinical chemistry including iron indices. Results: A total of 14 adverse events were observed in 10 patients, of which two adverse events in two patients were considered as being definitely related to drug administration. None of the patients had to be withdrawn from therapy. Significant changes in vital parameters and ECG during therapy and follow-up were not observed and clinical chemistry remained unchanged. Discussion: A single intravenous high-dose iron sucrose therapy in patients with IDA due to gastrointestinal blood loss appears to be safe and therefore is a therapeutic option which may save time and improve patient compliance.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.1
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available