Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text Freely available
Right arrow FREE Full Text (PDF) Freely available
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (26)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kosch, M.
Right arrow Articles by Schaefer, R. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kosch, M.
Right arrow Articles by Schaefer, R. M.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

Nephrol Dial Transplant (2001) 16: 1239-1244
© 2001 European Renal Association-European Dialysis and Transplant Association

A randomized, controlled parallel-group trial on efficacy and safety of iron sucrose (Venofer®) vs iron gluconate (Ferrlecit®) in haemodialysis patients treated with rHuEpo

Markus Kosch, Udo Bahner1, Helga Bettger1, Fritz Matzkies, Markus Teschner1 and Roland M. Schaefer

Department of Internal Medicine D, University of Münster, Germany and 1 KfH-Dialysis Centre, Würzburg, Germany

Background. The objectives of the present trial were to compare the efficacy and safety of two i.v. iron preparations with respect to haemoglobin levels, iron status and recombinant human erythropoetin (rHuEpo) dosage requirements in stable, rHuEpo-treated haemodialysis patients (maintenance phase of iron treatment) over 6 months.

Methods. A total of 59 patients were randomized and assigned to one of two treatment groups and 55 patients were analysed (iron sucrose n=27; iron gluconate n=28). Iron sucrose was administered in a dose of 250 mg iron diluted in 100 ml normal saline given over 60 min once per month, while 62.5 mg iron as iron gluconate was given once per week in a slow push injection (5 min).

Results. Efficacy parameters: Haemoglobin levels could be maintained from baseline to endpoint in both groups. There were, however, more patients in the iron sucrose group than in the iron gluconate group for whom treatment was discontinued because their haemoglobin values exceeded 12.5 g/dl or ferritin values exceeded 1000 ng/ml (five vs two and three vs one patient, respectively). Transferrin saturation and serum ferritin increased significantly in both groups (+255.7 ng/ml with iron sucrose and +278.5 ng/ml with iron gluconate), while rHuEpo dosage did not change significantly throughout the study. Safety parameters: There were a total of 174 infusions of iron sucrose and 720 injections of iron gluconate during the trial; all of them were well tolerated. In particular, we did not observe anaphylactoid reactions or any events suggestive of iron toxicity such as hypotension, dizziness, or nausea.

Conclusions. High doses of iron sucrose (Venofer® at a dose of 250 mg/month) was equally effective in maintaining haemoglobin and equally well tolerated as low doses of iron gluconate (Ferrlecit® at a dose of 62.5 mg once per week) in stable, rHuEpo treated haemodialysis patients.

Keywords: anaemia; haemodialysis; iron gluconate; iron sucrose; recombinant human erythropoietin

Correspondence and offprint requests to: Prof. Dr med. Roland M. Schaefer, Medizinische Poliklinik, Albert-Schweitzer-Str. 33, D-48129 Münster, Germany.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Nephrol Dial TransplantHome page
L. Schaefer and R. M. Schaefer
A primer on iron therapy
Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., September 1, 2007; 22(9): 2429 - 2431.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Nephrol Dial TransplantHome page
W. H. Horl, I. C. Macdougall, J. Rossert, and R. M. Schaefer
OPTA-therapy with iron and erythropoiesis-stimulating agents in chronic kidney disease
Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., June 1, 2007; 22(suppl_3): iii2 - iii6.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Am J Health Syst PharmHome page
J. M. Hollands, E. F. Foote, A. Rodriguez, J. Rothschild, and S. Young
Safety of high-dose iron sucrose infusion in hospitalized patients with chronic kidney disease
Am. J. Health Syst. Pharm., April 15, 2006; 63(8): 731 - 734.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
The Annals of PharmacotherapyHome page
C. E Saadeh and G. Srkalovic
Acute Hypersensitivity Reaction to Ferric Gluconate in a Premedicated Patient
Ann. Pharmacother., December 1, 2005; 39(12): 2124 - 2127.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Am. Soc. Nephrol.Home page
G. R. Aronoff
Safety of Intravenous Iron in Clinical Practice: Implications for Anemia Management Protocols
J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., December 1, 2004; 15(suppl_2): S99 - S106.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Nephrol Dial TransplantHome page
G. M. Chertow, P. D. Mason, O. Vaage-Nilsen, and J. Ahlmen
On the relative safety of parenteral iron formulations
Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., June 1, 2004; 19(6): 1571 - 1575.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Crit Care NurseHome page
S. Vernon and G. M. Pfeifer
Blood Management Strategies for Critical Care Patients
Crit. Care Nurse, December 1, 2003; 23(6): 34 - 41.
[Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
J. Am. Soc. Nephrol.Home page
G. Sengoelge, J. Kletzmayr, I. Ferrara, A. Perschl, W. H. Horl, and G. Sunder-Plassmann
Impairment of Transendothelial Leukocyte Migration by Iron Complexes
J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., October 1, 2003; 14(10): 2639 - 2644.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Nephrol Dial TransplantHome page
A. K. Salahudeen and R. M. Schaefer
High dose of bolus iron vs low dose of weekly infusion: bolusing high dose, a recipe for iron toxicity?
Nephrol. Dial. Transplant., May 1, 2002; 17(5): 939 - 940.
[Full Text]



Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.