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 .
Role of oral versus IV iron supplementation in the erythropoietic response to rHuEPO: a randomized, placebo-controlled trial.
BACKGROUND Preoperative treatment with rHuEPO ( epoetin alfa : EPREX , Janssen-Cilag ; or PROCRIT , Ortho Biotech ) in conjunction with iron supplementation increases the erythropoietic response in elective orthopedic surgery patients , but it is not known whether the magnitude of this response is dependent on the route of iron administration . STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS Non-iron-deficient patients undergoing elective orthopedic surgery ( N = 110 ) with baseline Hb > or = 10 to < or = 13 g per dL were r and omly assigned to receive either epoetin alfa ( 600 IU/kg ) plus IV iron ( n = 29 ) or oral iron ( n = 29 ) or placebo plus IV iron ( n = 25 ) or oral iron ( n = 27 ) in this 14-day study . RBC production , Hb , Hct , reticulocytes , iron status , and adverse events were monitored throughout the study . RESULTS Epoetin alfa treatment plus either oral or IV iron supplementation significantly increased total RBC production , Hb , Hct , and reticulocytes over the values seen with the respective placebo treatments ( p = 0.0001 ) . There were no differences between the epoetin alfa treatment groups . Placebo treatment plus oral or IV iron supplementation was not associated with increases in hematologic values . There were no differences in the incidence of adverse events among the treatment groups . CONCLUSION There was a comparable erythropoietic response to epoetin alfa , irrespective of the route of iron administration . The route of iron administration , therefore , does not modulate the erythropoietic response to epoetin alfa in patients who are not iron deficient . Safety and convenience benefits may be gained by adopting oral iron supplementation in this patient subset
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 .