4.6 Article

Intravenous ferric carboxymaltose compared with oral iron in the treatment of postpartum anemia - A randomized controlled trial

期刊

OBSTETRICS AND GYNECOLOGY
卷 110, 期 2, 页码 267-278

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/01.AOG.0000275286.03283.18

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: To estimate efficacy of rapid, large-dose intravenous (IV) administration of ferric carboxymaltose compared with oral iron therapy in anemic Postpartum women. Methods: In a randomized, controlled trial, we assigned anemic women (hemoglobin [Hb] less than or equal to 10 g/dL) within 10 days postpartum to receive either IV ferric carboxymaltose (less than or equal to 1,000 mg over 15 minutes, repeated weekly to achieve a total calculated replacement dose) or ferrous sulfate (FeSO4) 325 mg orally thrice daily for 6 weeks. Results: One hundred seventy-four patients received 350 IV doses of ferric carboxymaltose (mean total dose 1,403.1 mg) in 3, 2, or 1 injection (10.9%, 79.3%, or 9.8% of patients, respectively); 178 received FeSO4. Patients assigned to IV ferric carboxymaltose compared with those assigned to oral iron achieved a Hb rise greater than or equal to 2.0 g/dL earlier (7.0 compared with 14.0 days, P <.001), were more likely to achieve a Hb rise greater than or equal to 3.0 g/dL at any time (86.3% compared with 60.4%, P <.001), and were more likely to achieve a Hb greater than 12.0 g/dL (90.5% compared with 68.6%, P <.001). A similar proportion of patients achieved a Hb rise greater than or equal to 2.0 g/dL (96.4% compared with 94.1%, IV compared with oral, P=.443). There were no serious adverse drug reactions. Conclusion: Large-dose IV ferric carboxymaltose administration is a new iron agent that is effective for the treatment of postpartum anemia. When compared with oral ferrous sulfate, IV ferric carboxymaltose is better tolerated, prompts a more rapid Hb response, and corrects anemia more reliably. Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, www.clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00396292.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据