Cochrane · systematic review · CD010640
Iron therapy in anaemic adults without chronic kidney disease
Gurusamy, KS, Nagendran, M, Broadhurst, JF, et al. · Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews · 2014 · Cochrane Library
InjuriesAMSTAR 2: not assessed
SoF tableOnly the outcomes this review put in its Summary of Findings table are listed (the Cochrane Handbook caps them at about seven per comparison). Its other analyses are not shown here.
Questions
17
current version
GRADE rated
17
No studies
0
Included studies
NR
No studies 0 · 0%Ungraded 0 · 0%Very low 16 · 94.1%Low 1 · 5.9%Moderate 0 · 0%High 0 · 0%
Ungraded means an effect was reported without a GRADE rating; it is not a gap. No studies means the review found nothing to answer the question. The six categories are a display order, not a score.
Questions and results
Oral iron vs inactive control for anaemic patients
Population: patients with anaemia
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Mortality Oral iron vs inactive control | RR 1.05 [0.68, 1.61] | 4 studies · 659 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Proportion requiring blood transfusion Oral iron vs inactive control | RR 0.74 [0.55, 0.99] | 3 studies · 546 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Length of hospital stay Oral iron vs inactive control | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 300 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Haemoglobin g/dL Oral iron vs inactive control | no estimate extracted | 4 studies · 402 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency |
Quality of life Oral iron vs inactive control | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 276 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Serious adverse events Oral iron vs inactive control | RR 0.96 [0.76, 1.22] | 5 studies · 731 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Parenteral iron vs inactive control for anaemic patients
Population: patients with anaemia
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Mortality Parenteral iron vs inactive control | RR 1.04 [0.63, 1.69] | 10 studies · 2141 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, publication bias |
Proportion requiring blood transfusion Parenteral iron vs inactive control | RR 0.84 [0.66, 1.06] | 8 studies · 1315 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |
Haemoglobin g/dL Parenteral iron vs inactive control | no estimate extracted | 9 studies · 1371 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency |
Quality of life Parenteral iron vs inactive control | no estimate extracted | 4 studies · 1629 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency, publication bias |
Serious adverse events Parenteral iron vs inactive control | RR 1 [0.74, 1.34] | 7 studies · 1802 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, publication bias |
Parenteral iron vs oral iron for anaemic patients
Population: patients with anaemia
| Outcome | Effect | Evidence | Status / GRADE |
|---|---|---|---|
Mortality Parenteral iron vs oral iron | RR 1.49 [0.56, 3.94] | 6 studies · 1009 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, publication bias |
Proportion requiring blood transfusion Parenteral iron vs oral iron | RR 0.61 [0.24, 1.58] | 2 studies · 371 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, inconsistency, publication bias |
Mean blood transfused units Parenteral iron vs oral iron | no estimate extracted | 1 study · 44 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, publication bias |
Haemoglobin g/dL Parenteral iron vs oral iron | no estimate extracted | 6 studies · 769 participants | Low Downgraded: risk of bias, publication bias |
Quality of life Parenteral iron vs oral iron | no estimate extracted | 3 studies · 771 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias, publication bias |
Serious adverse events Parenteral iron vs oral iron | RR 1.23 [0.99, 1.54] | 7 studies · 1100 participants | Very low Downgraded: risk of bias |