Intravenous Versus Oral Iron After Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

ABSTRACT Background & Objective Few trials have compared the efficacy of intravenous (IV) iron repletion to oral repletion for patients with gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB). We aim to guide clinical decision‐making and optimize treatment strategies through the findings from these studies to prov...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Mohamed Abuelazm, Ahmed Fares, Mohammad Adam, Yazan Sallam, Ahmed Mazen Amin, Hosam I. Taha, Mustafa Turkmani, Fouad Jaber
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2025-07-01
Series:JGH Open
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1002/jgh3.70225
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
_version_ 1849419246481702912
author Mohamed Abuelazm
Ahmed Fares
Mohammad Adam
Yazan Sallam
Ahmed Mazen Amin
Hosam I. Taha
Mustafa Turkmani
Fouad Jaber
author_facet Mohamed Abuelazm
Ahmed Fares
Mohammad Adam
Yazan Sallam
Ahmed Mazen Amin
Hosam I. Taha
Mustafa Turkmani
Fouad Jaber
author_sort Mohamed Abuelazm
collection DOAJ
description ABSTRACT Background & Objective Few trials have compared the efficacy of intravenous (IV) iron repletion to oral repletion for patients with gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB). We aim to guide clinical decision‐making and optimize treatment strategies through the findings from these studies to provide a step closer to a consensus on the most effective approach to iron supplementation for patients with GIB. Methods A systematic review and meta‐analysis synthesizing evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) obtained from PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, Scopus, and Web of Science from inception to April 2024. We used the fixed‐effects model to report dichotomous outcomes using risk ratio (RR) and continuous outcomes using mean difference (MD), with a 95% confidence interval (CI). PROSPERO ID: CRD42024542759. Results Three RCTs that included 254 patients were included. IV iron was significantly associated with increased complete response (RR: 1.60 with 95% CI [1.24, 2.07], p < 0.01) compared to oral iron, with no significant difference between IV iron and oral iron in partial response (RR: 2.13 with 95% CI [0.60, 7.50], p = 0.24). IV iron was significantly associated with increased Hb concentration (MD: 1.45 g/dL with 95% CI [0.50, 2.40], p < 0.01) and ferritin change (MD: 220.02 μg/L with 95% CI [22.31, 417.73], p = 0.03) compared to oral iron. However, there was no significant difference between IV and oral iron in transferrin saturation (MD: 4.71% with 95% CI [−5.96, 15.38], p = 0.39). Conclusion With uncertain evidence, IV iron demonstrated increased hemoglobin and ferritin concentrations and achieved complete response rates in patients with GIB.
format Article
id doaj-art-e807b4d8171d44669684604837f3d867
institution Kabale University
issn 2397-9070
language English
publishDate 2025-07-01
publisher Wiley
record_format Article
series JGH Open
spelling doaj-art-e807b4d8171d44669684604837f3d8672025-08-20T03:32:11ZengWileyJGH Open2397-90702025-07-0197n/an/a10.1002/jgh3.70225Intravenous Versus Oral Iron After Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of Randomized Controlled TrialsMohamed Abuelazm0Ahmed Fares1Mohammad Adam2Yazan Sallam3Ahmed Mazen Amin4Hosam I. Taha5Mustafa Turkmani6Fouad Jaber7Faculty of Medicine Tanta University Tanta EgyptDivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Henry Ford Hospital Detroit Michigan USADepartment of Internal Medicine University of Missouri‐Kansas City Kansas City USADepartment of Internal Medicine University of Missouri‐Kansas City Kansas City USAFaculty of Medicine, Mansoura University Mansoura EgyptFaculty of Medicine Tanta University Tanta EgyptFaculty of Medicine Michigan State University East Lansing Michigan USADivision of Gastroenterology and Hepatology Baylor College of Medicine Houston Texas USAABSTRACT Background & Objective Few trials have compared the efficacy of intravenous (IV) iron repletion to oral repletion for patients with gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB). We aim to guide clinical decision‐making and optimize treatment strategies through the findings from these studies to provide a step closer to a consensus on the most effective approach to iron supplementation for patients with GIB. Methods A systematic review and meta‐analysis synthesizing evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs) obtained from PubMed, Embase, CENTRAL, Scopus, and Web of Science from inception to April 2024. We used the fixed‐effects model to report dichotomous outcomes using risk ratio (RR) and continuous outcomes using mean difference (MD), with a 95% confidence interval (CI). PROSPERO ID: CRD42024542759. Results Three RCTs that included 254 patients were included. IV iron was significantly associated with increased complete response (RR: 1.60 with 95% CI [1.24, 2.07], p < 0.01) compared to oral iron, with no significant difference between IV iron and oral iron in partial response (RR: 2.13 with 95% CI [0.60, 7.50], p = 0.24). IV iron was significantly associated with increased Hb concentration (MD: 1.45 g/dL with 95% CI [0.50, 2.40], p < 0.01) and ferritin change (MD: 220.02 μg/L with 95% CI [22.31, 417.73], p = 0.03) compared to oral iron. However, there was no significant difference between IV and oral iron in transferrin saturation (MD: 4.71% with 95% CI [−5.96, 15.38], p = 0.39). Conclusion With uncertain evidence, IV iron demonstrated increased hemoglobin and ferritin concentrations and achieved complete response rates in patients with GIB.https://doi.org/10.1002/jgh3.70225anemiahemorrhagetransfusionvaricealvarices
spellingShingle Mohamed Abuelazm
Ahmed Fares
Mohammad Adam
Yazan Sallam
Ahmed Mazen Amin
Hosam I. Taha
Mustafa Turkmani
Fouad Jaber
Intravenous Versus Oral Iron After Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
JGH Open
anemia
hemorrhage
transfusion
variceal
varices
title Intravenous Versus Oral Iron After Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_full Intravenous Versus Oral Iron After Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_fullStr Intravenous Versus Oral Iron After Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_full_unstemmed Intravenous Versus Oral Iron After Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_short Intravenous Versus Oral Iron After Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Systematic Review and Meta‐Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
title_sort intravenous versus oral iron after gastrointestinal bleeding a systematic review and meta analysis of randomized controlled trials
topic anemia
hemorrhage
transfusion
variceal
varices
url https://doi.org/10.1002/jgh3.70225
work_keys_str_mv AT mohamedabuelazm intravenousversusoralironaftergastrointestinalbleedingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT ahmedfares intravenousversusoralironaftergastrointestinalbleedingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT mohammadadam intravenousversusoralironaftergastrointestinalbleedingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT yazansallam intravenousversusoralironaftergastrointestinalbleedingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT ahmedmazenamin intravenousversusoralironaftergastrointestinalbleedingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT hosamitaha intravenousversusoralironaftergastrointestinalbleedingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT mustafaturkmani intravenousversusoralironaftergastrointestinalbleedingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials
AT fouadjaber intravenousversusoralironaftergastrointestinalbleedingasystematicreviewandmetaanalysisofrandomizedcontrolledtrials