There was no increased risk of infections with IV iron .
Gastrointestinal AEs were reduced with IV iron .
CONCLUSION Intravenous iron therapy is not associated with an increased risk of SAEs or infections .
Infusion reactions are more pronounced with IV iron
OBJECTIVE To amass all available evidence regarding the safety of intravenous ( IV ) iron preparations to provide a true balance of efficacy and safety .
[Effectiveness of oral versus parenteral iron substitution in autologous blood donors].
OBJECTIVE Is intravenous iron therapy as efficient as oral iron supplementation in patients undergoing autologous blood donation ? DESIGN Prospect i ve , r and omized study . PATIENTS AND SETTING 30 male and 30 female patients , separated into two groups were examined prior to total hip replacement . INTERVENTIONS Patients of group O were given 6 x 50 mg Fe2 + aspartate/day orally , and patients of group P were given 0.75 mg/kg BW complex-bound Fe3 + once a week by infusion . In both groups therapy was started two weeks prior to the first donation . The substitution was continued the following six weeks until surgery . Hemoglobin , ferritin plasma concentrations and reticulocytes were monitored . The appearance of unwanted side effects was studied by question naire . RESULTS Hb decreased significantly in both groups . A difference was seen in the reticulocyte count and in the ferritin levels . Here we found a significant increase in group P compared with group O. 40 % of the patients who took the iron orally complained about unwanted side effects such as obstipation and diarrhoea , whereas none of the patients of the parenteral group had any complaints . CONCLUSIONS Stimulation of the erythropoiesis appeared to be more efficient with intravenous iron therapy than with oral iron supplementation . The oral dose has in about 40 % unwanted side effects . For this reason a parenteral iron therapy can be considered , but one must be aware that in some cases dangerous anaphylactic reactions could appear
There was no increased risk of infections with IV iron .
Gastrointestinal AEs were reduced with IV iron .
CONCLUSION Intravenous iron therapy is not associated with an increased risk of SAEs or infections .
Infusion reactions are more pronounced with IV iron
OBJECTIVE To amass all available evidence regarding the safety of intravenous ( IV ) iron preparations to provide a true balance of efficacy and safety .