Lei Yue, Jianming Zhang, Chao Li, Ziqi Wang, Longtao Qi, Yao Zhao, Shijun Wang, Meixia Shang, Chunde Li, Haolin Sun
{"title":"Preoperative intravenous versus oral iron supplementation for elective surgery: evidence based on 12 randomized trials.","authors":"Lei Yue, Jianming Zhang, Chao Li, Ziqi Wang, Longtao Qi, Yao Zhao, Shijun Wang, Meixia Shang, Chunde Li, Haolin Sun","doi":"10.1080/00325481.2025.2454218","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Interpretation: </strong>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.</p><p><strong>Registration: </strong>PROSPERO CRD42023483284.</p>","PeriodicalId":94176,"journal":{"name":"Postgraduate medicine","volume":" ","pages":"1-9"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-01-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Postgraduate medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/00325481.2025.2454218","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
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.