Intravenous iron in digestive diseases: a clinical (re)view

Ferric carboxymaltose for anemia in Crohn’s disease patients at a tertiary center: A retrospective observational cohort study

BACKGROUND

Although the gastrointestinal tract is the most affected by Crohn’s disease (CD), the condition triggers other consequent manifestations, and iron deficiency anemia (IDA) is one of the most common. Intravenous (IV) iron replacement is currently available through several drugs, such as ferric hydroxide sucrose and ferric carboxymaltose (FCM). However, the clinical management of these conditions can be challenging.

AIM

To elucidate the drug’s effectiveness, the present study analyzed, through medical records, the clinical and epidemiological data of a cohort of patients with active CD who received IV FCM for the IDA treatment.

METHODS

This retrospective observational study included 25 patients with active CD, severe anemia, and refractory to previous conventional treatments. Patients were evaluated two times: During the last treatment with ferric hydroxide sucrose and treatment with FCM.

RESULTS

After treatment with FCM, parameters of IDA assessment significantly improved, serum hemoglobin (Hb) levels increased in 93% of patients (P < 0.0001), and in 44%, there was an increase of ≥ 2 g/dL in a single application. In addition, 86% of the patients showed an increase in serum iron (P < 0.0001) and ferritin (P = 0.0008) and 50% in transferrin saturation (P = 0.01). The serum iron levels at baseline showed a negative association with the ileal and colonic CD and use of biologics and a positive association with patients who developed CD later in life after the age of 40 (A3) and with a stenosing (B2) and fistulizing (B3) phenotype. The values of Hb and hematocrit after ferric hydroxide sucrose treatment remained similar to those found before treatment.

CONCLUSION

This study demonstrated that FCM is an important therapeutic strategy for treating IDA in CD patients, achieving satisfactory results in refractory cases.

Management of iron-deficiency anemia following acute gastrointestinal hemorrhage: A narrative analysis and review

Many patients experiencing acute gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB) require iron supplementation to treat subsequent iron deficiency (ID) or iron-deficiency anemia (IDA). Guidelines regarding management of these patients are lacking. We aimed to identify areas of unmet need in patients with ID/IDA following acute GIB in terms of patient management and physician guidance. We formed an international working group of gastroenterologists to conduct a narrative review based on PubMed and EMBASE database searches (from January 2000 to February 2021), integrated with observations from our own clinical experience. Published data on this subject are limited and disparate, and those relating to post-discharge outcomes, such as persistent anemia and re-hospitalization, are particularly lacking. Often, there is no post-discharge follow-up of these patients by a gastroenterologist. Acute GIB-related ID/IDA, however, is a prevalent condition both at the time of hospital admission and at hospital discharge and is likely underdiagnosed and undertreated. Despite limited data, there appears to be notable variation in the prescribing of intravenous (IV)/oral iron regimens. There is also some evidence suggesting that, compared with oral iron, IV iron may restore iron levels faster following acute GIB, have a better tolerability profile, and be more beneficial in terms of quality of life. Gaps in patient care exist in the management of acute GIB-related ID/IDA, yet further data from large population-based studies are needed to confirm this. We advocate the formulation of evidence-based guidance on the use of iron therapies in these patients, aiding a more standardized best-practice approach to patient care.

Rational Management of Iron-Deficiency Anaemia in Inflammatory Bowel Disease

Anaemia is the most frequent, though often neglected, comorbidity of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD). Here we want to briefly present (1) the burden of anaemia in IBD, (2) its pathophysiology, which mostly arises from bleeding-associated iron deficiency, followed by (3) diagnostic evaluation of anaemia, (4) a balanced overview of the different modes of iron replacement therapy, (5) evidence for their therapeutic efficacy and subsequently, (6) an updated recommendation for the practical management of anaemia in IBD. Following the introduction of various intravenous iron preparations over the last decade, questions persist about when to use these preparations as opposed to traditional and other novel oral iron therapeutic agents. At present, oral iron therapy is generally preferred for patients with quiescent IBD and mild iron-deficiency anaemia. However, in patients with flaring IBD that hampers intestinal iron absorption and in those with inadequate responses to or side effects with oral preparations, intravenous iron supplementation is the therapy of choice, although information on the efficacy of intravenous iron in patients with active IBD and anaemia is scare. Importantly, anaemia in IBD is often multifactorial and a careful diagnostic workup is mandatory for optimized treatment. Nevertheless, limited information is available on optimal therapeutic start and end points for treatment of anaemia. Of note, neither oral nor intravenous therapies seem to exacerbate the clinical course of IBD. However, additional prospective studies are still warranted to determine the optimal therapy in complex conditions such as IBD.

Anemia and iron deficiency in gastrointestinal and liver conditions

Iron deficiency anemia (IDA) is associated with a number of pathological gastrointestinal conditions other than inflammatory bowel disease, and also with liver disorders. Different factors such as chronic bleeding, malabsorption and inflammation may contribute to IDA. Although patients with symptoms of anemia are frequently referred to gastroenterologists, the approach to diagnosis and selection of treatment as well as follow-up measures is not standardized and suboptimal. Iron deficiency, even without anemia, can substantially impact physical and cognitive function and reduce quality of life. Therefore, regular iron status assessment and awareness of the clinical consequences of impaired iron status are critical. While the range of options for treatment of IDA is increasing due to the availability of effective and well-tolerated parenteral iron preparations, a comprehensive overview of IDA and its therapy in patients with gastrointestinal conditions is currently lacking. Furthermore, definitions and assessment of iron status lack harmonization and there is a paucity of expert guidelines on this topic. This review summarizes current thinking concerning IDA as a common co-morbidity in specific gastrointestinal and liver disorders, and thus encourages a more unified treatment approach to anemia and iron deficiency, while offering gastroenterologists guidance on treatment options for IDA in everyday clinical practice.

Management of Iron-Deficiency Anemia in Inflammatory Bowel Disease: A Systematic Review

Anemia is the most frequent complication of inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), but anemia, mostly due to iron deficiency, has long been neglected in these patients. The aim was to briefly present the pathophysiology, followed by a balanced overview of the different forms of iron replacement available, and subsequently, to perform a systematic review of studies performed in the last decade on the treatment of iron-deficiency anemia in IBD. Given that intravenous therapies have been introduced in the last decade, a systematic review performed in PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and the websites of WHO, FDA, and EMA covered prospective trials investigating the management of iron-deficiency anemia in IBD published since 2004. A total of 632 articles were reviewed, and 13 articles (2906 patients) with unique content were included. In general, oral supplementation in iron-deficiency anemia should be administered with a target to restore/replenish the iron stores and the hemoglobin level in a suitable way. However, in patients with IBD flares and inadequate responses to or side effects with oral preparations, intravenous iron supplementation is the therapy of choice. Neither oral nor intravenous therapy seems to exacerbate the clinical course of IBD, and intravenous iron therapy can be administered even in active disease stages and concomitantly with biologics. In conclusion, because many physicians are in doubt as to how to manage anemia and iron deficiency in IBD, there is a clear need for the implementation of evidence-based recommendations on this matter. Based on the data presented, oral iron therapy should be preferred for patients with quiescent disease stages and trivial iron deficiency anemia unless such patients are intolerant or have an inadequate response, whereas intravenous iron supplementation may be of advantage in patients with aggravated anemia or flares of IBD because inflammation hampers intestinal absorption of iron.

Intravenous iron in inflammatory bowel diseases

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Anemia and iron deficiency are the most common extraintestinal complications of inflammatory bowel diseases (IBDs) and are often undertreated. We review the evidence on intravenous (i.v.) iron overcoming the limitations of oral iron in IBD.

RECENT FINDINGS

Recent reports demonstrate that i.v. iron is at least as effective, quicker, and better tolerated than oral iron. Moreover, experimental data confirm that oral and parenteral iron have divergent effects on intestinal mucosa: oral iron severely increasing inflammation. Observational and randomized studies prove that i.v. iron is not only effective but also well tolerated with no negative influence in the activity of IBD. A new formulation, iron carboxymaltose, which permits higher individual doses, has been shown more effective and less costly than standard iron sucrose. Another formulation, iron isomaltoside, shows promising in in-vitro and small clinical studies, but data from large trials are not available yet.

SUMMARY

Oral iron is not an ideal option for treating anemia and iron deficiency in IBD. i.v. iron should be preferred at least in five scenarios: intolerance to oral iron, severe anemia, failure of oral therapy, need for a quick recovery, and use of erythropoietin. Direct evidence in IBD patients not only confirms the effectiveness of i.v. iron, but also demonstrates that new, more convenient preparations probably will become the standard in the near future.