• Bernd Froessler, Carmel Cocchiaro, Khaschayar Saadat-Gilani, Nicolette Hodyl, and Gustaaf Dekker.
• Department of Anaesthesia, Lyell McEwin Hospital, Elizabeth Vale, SA, Australia. bernd.froessler@health.sa.gov.au
• J. Matern. Fetal. Neonatal. Med. 2013 May 1; 26 (7): 654-9.

ObjectiveTo compare oral iron to intravenous iron administration to women in late pregnancy and/or after labor to correct iron deficiency.Methods271 anemic women (148 pregnant women and 123 women post lower segment caesarean section) with hemoglobin (Hb) levels below 110 g/L were enrolled over a two-year period and randomized to receive either two tablets FGF (ferrous sulfate with folic acid) or 400 mg of intravenous iron sucrose plus folic acid 600 µg. Treatment effectiveness was assessed by measuring Hb and ferritin postpartum on day 1, day 14 and day 42. Transfusions of red blood cells and adverse drug reactions were recorded.ResultsData of 214 women were available for analysis. Both forms of iron replacement therapy led to increased hemoglobin and ferritin levels over the testing period. Ferritin was significantly higher in the i.v. iron treatment group compared to the oral iron treatment group (p = 0.004) two weeks after delivery, while Hb values did not differ between the groups. No serious adverse drug reactions were observed. Red blood cell transfusion rate was low (1.9%), with equal rates observed in both treatment groups.ConclusionIntravenous and oral irons were both effective in correcting peripartum anemia, although intravenous iron restored stores faster than oral iron.

32 keywords...

hide…