一项系统综述调查了腹膜透析中静脉给铁的安全性和有效性。

IF 1.8 4区 医学 Q3 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
British journal of hospital medicine Pub Date : 2025-09-25 Epub Date: 2025-09-12 DOI:10.12968/hmed.2024.0874
Sebastian Spencer, Rosa Maeve McGing, Samantha Hunter, Sunil Bhandari
{"title":"一项系统综述调查了腹膜透析中静脉给铁的安全性和有效性。","authors":"Sebastian Spencer, Rosa Maeve McGing, Samantha Hunter, Sunil Bhandari","doi":"10.12968/hmed.2024.0874","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Aims/Background</b> Anaemia is a common complication in chronic kidney disease, particularly in people with advanced kidney failure, contributing to increased morbidity and mortality. Iron repletion and erythropoietin-stimulating agents are widely used to manage anaemia, reducing the need for blood transfusions. However, these treatments carry risks, including thrombosis and cardiovascular issues. While intravenous iron is an established therapy for people receiving haemodialysis, its safety and efficacy in people undergoing peritoneal dialysis remain uncertain, partly due to limited data. This review assesses the current evidence on intravenous iron for managing anaemia in peritoneal dialysis, focusing on its impact on iron status, safety, and clinical outcomes. <b>Methods</b> Systematic searches of MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, HMIC, AMED and CINAHL were conducted. All eligible studies investigating intravenous iron therapy in adults with end-stage kidney failure undergoing peritoneal dialysis were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklists for randomised, quasi-randomised and cohort studies. Sensitivity analysis was performed by comparing fixed and random effects models, removing outliers and performing a leave-one-out analysis. Studies had considerable heterogeneity when tested with Cochran's Q Test and the I<sup>2</sup> statistic. Where meta-analyses were not possible, narrative syntheses were conducted due to expected variations in iron dosing and monitoring practices, allowing for a more contextualised analysis of the data across heterogeneous study designs. <b>Results</b> 9 studies were included (3 studies compared intravenous to oral iron). The mean ferritin increase was 153.07 ng/mL (95% confidence interval (CI): 107.30-198.84; <i>p</i> < 0.0001) after sensitivity analysis. The mean transferrin saturation increase was 9.29% (95% CI: 2.98-15.61; <i>p</i> = 0.0039). <b>Conclusion</b> Despite the variability, the included studies consistently show that intravenous (IV) iron improves ferritin, transferrin saturation, haemoglobin, and haematocrit levels, while reporting few adverse events. Future research should focus on optimal dosing, safety, and outcomes beyond anaemia, such as cardiovascular health and quality of life, to maximise patient benefits. <b>Systematic Review Registration</b> PROSPERO (CRD42022363043).</p>","PeriodicalId":9256,"journal":{"name":"British journal of hospital medicine","volume":"86 9","pages":"1-28"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A Systematic Review Investigates the Safety and Efficacy of Intravenous Iron Dosing in Peritoneal Dialysis.\",\"authors\":\"Sebastian Spencer, Rosa Maeve McGing, Samantha Hunter, Sunil Bhandari\",\"doi\":\"10.12968/hmed.2024.0874\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Aims/Background</b> Anaemia is a common complication in chronic kidney disease, particularly in people with advanced kidney failure, contributing to increased morbidity and mortality. Iron repletion and erythropoietin-stimulating agents are widely used to manage anaemia, reducing the need for blood transfusions. However, these treatments carry risks, including thrombosis and cardiovascular issues. While intravenous iron is an established therapy for people receiving haemodialysis, its safety and efficacy in people undergoing peritoneal dialysis remain uncertain, partly due to limited data. This review assesses the current evidence on intravenous iron for managing anaemia in peritoneal dialysis, focusing on its impact on iron status, safety, and clinical outcomes. <b>Methods</b> Systematic searches of MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, HMIC, AMED and CINAHL were conducted. All eligible studies investigating intravenous iron therapy in adults with end-stage kidney failure undergoing peritoneal dialysis were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklists for randomised, quasi-randomised and cohort studies. Sensitivity analysis was performed by comparing fixed and random effects models, removing outliers and performing a leave-one-out analysis. Studies had considerable heterogeneity when tested with Cochran's Q Test and the I<sup>2</sup> statistic. Where meta-analyses were not possible, narrative syntheses were conducted due to expected variations in iron dosing and monitoring practices, allowing for a more contextualised analysis of the data across heterogeneous study designs. <b>Results</b> 9 studies were included (3 studies compared intravenous to oral iron). The mean ferritin increase was 153.07 ng/mL (95% confidence interval (CI): 107.30-198.84; <i>p</i> < 0.0001) after sensitivity analysis. The mean transferrin saturation increase was 9.29% (95% CI: 2.98-15.61; <i>p</i> = 0.0039). <b>Conclusion</b> Despite the variability, the included studies consistently show that intravenous (IV) iron improves ferritin, transferrin saturation, haemoglobin, and haematocrit levels, while reporting few adverse events. Future research should focus on optimal dosing, safety, and outcomes beyond anaemia, such as cardiovascular health and quality of life, to maximise patient benefits. <b>Systematic Review Registration</b> PROSPERO (CRD42022363043).</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9256,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"British journal of hospital medicine\",\"volume\":\"86 9\",\"pages\":\"1-28\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"British journal of hospital medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.12968/hmed.2024.0874\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/9/12 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British journal of hospital medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12968/hmed.2024.0874","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/9/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的/背景贫血是慢性肾脏疾病的常见并发症,特别是在晚期肾衰竭患者中,导致发病率和死亡率增加。铁补充和促红细胞生成素被广泛用于治疗贫血,减少输血的需要。然而,这些治疗有风险,包括血栓和心血管问题。虽然静脉注射铁是血液透析患者的既定治疗方法,但其在腹膜透析患者中的安全性和有效性仍不确定,部分原因是数据有限。本综述评估了目前关于静脉注射铁治疗腹膜透析贫血的证据,重点关注其对铁状态、安全性和临床结果的影响。方法系统检索MEDLINE、Embase、Cochrane Library、HMIC、AMED和CINAHL。所有对接受腹膜透析的终末期肾衰竭患者进行静脉铁治疗的符合条件的研究被纳入。使用乔安娜布里格斯研究所的随机、准随机和队列研究清单来评估偏倚风险。通过比较固定效应和随机效应模型,去除异常值并进行留一分析来进行敏感性分析。当用科克伦Q检验和I2统计量进行检验时,研究有相当大的异质性。在不可能进行meta分析的情况下,由于铁剂量和监测实践的预期变化,进行了叙述性综合,允许对异质研究设计的数据进行更背景化的分析。结果纳入9项研究(其中3项研究比较静脉注射铁与口服铁)。铁蛋白平均升高153.07 ng/mL(95%可信区间(CI): 107.30-198.84;P < 0.0001)。转铁蛋白饱和度平均升高9.29% (95% CI: 2.98 ~ 15.61; p = 0.0039)。结论:尽管存在差异,但纳入的研究一致表明,静脉注射铁可改善铁蛋白、转铁蛋白饱和度、血红蛋白和红细胞压积水平,同时报告的不良事件很少。未来的研究应侧重于最佳剂量、安全性和贫血以外的结果,如心血管健康和生活质量,以最大限度地提高患者获益。系统评价注册PROSPERO (CRD42022363043)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
A Systematic Review Investigates the Safety and Efficacy of Intravenous Iron Dosing in Peritoneal Dialysis.

Aims/Background Anaemia is a common complication in chronic kidney disease, particularly in people with advanced kidney failure, contributing to increased morbidity and mortality. Iron repletion and erythropoietin-stimulating agents are widely used to manage anaemia, reducing the need for blood transfusions. However, these treatments carry risks, including thrombosis and cardiovascular issues. While intravenous iron is an established therapy for people receiving haemodialysis, its safety and efficacy in people undergoing peritoneal dialysis remain uncertain, partly due to limited data. This review assesses the current evidence on intravenous iron for managing anaemia in peritoneal dialysis, focusing on its impact on iron status, safety, and clinical outcomes. Methods Systematic searches of MEDLINE, Embase, Cochrane Library, HMIC, AMED and CINAHL were conducted. All eligible studies investigating intravenous iron therapy in adults with end-stage kidney failure undergoing peritoneal dialysis were included. The risk of bias was assessed using the Joanna Briggs Institute checklists for randomised, quasi-randomised and cohort studies. Sensitivity analysis was performed by comparing fixed and random effects models, removing outliers and performing a leave-one-out analysis. Studies had considerable heterogeneity when tested with Cochran's Q Test and the I2 statistic. Where meta-analyses were not possible, narrative syntheses were conducted due to expected variations in iron dosing and monitoring practices, allowing for a more contextualised analysis of the data across heterogeneous study designs. Results 9 studies were included (3 studies compared intravenous to oral iron). The mean ferritin increase was 153.07 ng/mL (95% confidence interval (CI): 107.30-198.84; p < 0.0001) after sensitivity analysis. The mean transferrin saturation increase was 9.29% (95% CI: 2.98-15.61; p = 0.0039). Conclusion Despite the variability, the included studies consistently show that intravenous (IV) iron improves ferritin, transferrin saturation, haemoglobin, and haematocrit levels, while reporting few adverse events. Future research should focus on optimal dosing, safety, and outcomes beyond anaemia, such as cardiovascular health and quality of life, to maximise patient benefits. Systematic Review Registration PROSPERO (CRD42022363043).

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
British journal of hospital medicine
British journal of hospital medicine 医学-医学:内科
CiteScore
1.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
176
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: British Journal of Hospital Medicine was established in 1966, and is still true to its origins: a monthly, peer-reviewed, multidisciplinary review journal for hospital doctors and doctors in training. The journal publishes an authoritative mix of clinical reviews, education and training updates, quality improvement projects and case reports, and book reviews from recognized leaders in the profession. The Core Training for Doctors section provides clinical information in an easily accessible format for doctors in training. British Journal of Hospital Medicine is an invaluable resource for hospital doctors at all stages of their career. The journal is indexed on Medline, CINAHL, the Sociedad Iberoamericana de Información Científica and Scopus.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信