4.3 Article

Ferrous fumarate deteriorated plasma antioxidant status in patients with Crohn disease

期刊

SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF GASTROENTEROLOGY
卷 38, 期 5, 页码 543-548

出版社

TAYLOR & FRANCIS LTD
DOI: 10.1080/00365520310000771

关键词

antioxidants; Crohn disease; ferrous compounds; intestinal absorption; iron

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Iron deficiency anaemia is a frequent complication of Crohn disease. Treatment with ferrous iron (Fe2+) compounds is often unsatisfactory and is associated with gastrointestinal side effects. Theoretically, oral iron supplementation may even be harmful, because iron may reinforce intestinal inflammation by catalysing production of reactive oxygen species. We investigated the effect of ferrous iron on disease activity and plasma antioxidant status in patients with active Crohn disease. Methods: Ten patients with Crohn disease and iron deficiency and 10 healthy controls were given ferrous fumarate 120 mg for 7 days. The Crohn Disease Activity Index, gastrointestinal complaints and blood samples for antioxidant status, anaemia, inflammation and iron absorption were investigated on day 1 and day 8. Results: During 1 week of ferrous fumarate supplementation, the Crohn Disease Activity Index tended to increase (P = 0.071). Patients experienced aggravation of diarrhoea, abdominal pain and nausea. Plasma-reduced cysteine was lower (P = 0.038) in patients than it was in controls. One week of ferrous iron supplementation further decreased reduced cysteine (P < 0.001) and significantly decreased plasma-reduced glutathione (P = 0.004) in the patients. Serum iron increased significantly in patients after an oral iron load test (from 5.8 +/- 3.2 mu mol/L to 30.9 +/- 13.1 mu mol/L). Conclusions: Treatment of iron deficiency with ferrous fumarate deteriorated plasma antioxidant status and increased specific clinical symptoms in patients with active Crohn disease. Plasma reduced cysteine may be a sensitive indicator for oxidative stress in the intestine.

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

4.3
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