Why the study?
The study aimed to clarify hematological parameters, transfusion requirements, and adverse events of preoperative intravenous versus oral iron supplementation in elective surgery patients.
Does preoperative intravenous iron supplementation improve hematological parameters and reduce transfusion requirements compared to oral iron supplementation in elective surgery patients?
Does preoperative intravenous iron supplementation improve hematological parameters and reduce transfusion requirements compared to oral iron supplementation in elective surgery patients?
Preoperative intravenous iron supplementation improves hematological parameters more effectively than oral iron but does not reduce transfusion needs and increases pain-related adverse events.
Supports preoperative IV iron for superior Hb recovery in elective surgery despite pain risk; extends RCT meta-analysis on anemia optimization.
AIM: This study aims to clarify hematological parameters, transfusion requirements, and adverse events of preoperative intravenous (IVIS) versus oral iron supplementation (OIS) in elective surgery patients. METHODS: We conducted a comprehensive literature search across multiple databases up to 10 December 2023. Twelve RCTs involving 930 participants met our eligibility criteria. Our analysis focused on post-treatment hemoglobin levels, changes in hemoglobin from baseline, ferritin levels, hemoglobin attainment rates, transfusion requirements, and adverse events. We employed the random-effects model for data synthesis, calculating pooled standard mean differences (SMD) or mean differences (MD) or risk ratios (RR) with 95% confidence intervals (CI). Methodological quality was assessed using the Cochrane ROB 2 tool. The GRADE approach evaluated the confidence in effect estimates. FINDINGS: IVIS significantly improved post-treatment hemoglobin levels (MD = 0.77 g/dL, 95% CI [0.30 to 1.23]), hemoglobin increments (MD = 0.69 g/dL, 95% CI [0.01 to 1.37]), and ferritin levels (MD = 260.03 ng/mL, 95% CI [119.65 to 400.42]) compared to OIS. IVIS also led to a higher hemoglobin attainment rate (RR = 1.88, 95% CI [1.24 to 2.86]). No significant differences were noted in transfusion rates or volumes. IVIS was associated with fewer digestive (RR = 0.10, 95% CI [0.05 to 0.22]; I2 = 0%) but more pain-related adverse events (RR = 7.79, 95% CI [1.78 to 34.07]; I2 = 0%). Hospital stay durations and mortality rates were similar between the two groups. INTERPRETATION: IVIS offers a superior improvement in hematological parameters for elective surgery patients but not reducing transfusion needs compared to OIS. While IVIS has fewer digestive adverse events, it increases pain-related complications. These findings highlight the importance of personalized approaches in selecting iron supplementation methods, carefully balancing time, efficacy, and adverse event profiles. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42023483284.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Yue et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: