ADMINISTRATION OF INTRAVENOUS IRON SUCROSE AS A 2-MINUTE PUSH
TO CKD PATIENTS: A PROSPECTIVE EVALUATION OF 2,297 INJECTIONS
Macdougall IC, Roche A
Am J Kidney Dis 2005 Aug;46(2):283-9.
ITO review
Reviewed by: Donald Silverberg
Design
A prospective, single-center, cohort study. Period: unknown.
Setting: Department of Renal Medicine, King’s College Hospital, London,
UK.
Background
Intravenous (IV) therapy is used in conjunction with
erythropoietin (EPO) therapy in order to optimize erythropoiesis, especially in
anemic patients undergoing hemodialysis (HD). IV iron used alone has been shown
to increase hemoglobin (Hb) levels, whereas when used in conjunction with EPO it
enables a reduction in EPO dose requirements and therefore an increase in cost
savings.
The Revised European Best Practice Guidelines (ITO Link)
advocate the use of IV iron in all HD patients. Optimum IV iron therapy
protocols for patients receiving peritoneal dialysis, or with failing renal
transplants or with chronic kidney disease (CKD) not on dialysis, remain to be
established. Due to the fact that these patients do not have a ready vascular
access for the administration of IV iron, many clinics in the UK administer
large doses of IV iron as an infusion often lasting more than one hour; this is
impractical in an outpatient setting. The administration of IV iron as a bolus
injection is more practical.
In this way the authors of the present study sought to examine
both the safety and the practicability of the administration of a 200 mg bolus
injection of IV iron sucrose to non-hemodialysis CKD patients.
Methods
All patients referred to the Anemia Nurse Specialist (AR) for
the administration of IV iron were included in this study (47.6% males, mean age
59.9 years). Exclusion criteria were patients undergoing HD as they were already
undergoing IV iron treatment, and patients with previous reaction to IV iron.
The mean (± SD) Hb concentration for the total population was 11.2 ± 1.5 g/dL,
and serum ferritin (SF) 89 ± 67 µg/L. Of the patients, 59 % received EPO therapy
(mean dose, 6,487 ± 3,957 U/wk).
A butterfly cannula was used to administer 200 mg of IV iron
sucrose as an undiluted bolus injection over 2 minutes. Patients were observed
for between 30 and 60 minutes following IV iron administration. Hb, SF, EPO
doses were recorded at the time of injection. Adverse events were recorded by
the AR up to 30 minutes following injection. The presence of phlebitis within 2
days of IV iron injection was also assessed.
Results
During the study period, 2,297 injections were administered to
657 patients: 217 with a calculated creatinine clearance > 30 mL/min, 215
with a calculated creatinine clearance < 30 mL/min, 124 patients were
undergoing peritoneal dialysis, 87 patients had failing renal transplants and
there were 14 nonrenal patients. In 412 injections (17.9%), patients noted a
metallic taste. Upon their second injection, 97.5% of patients reported that
they had had an otherwise uneventful first injection without reactions or side
effects; no case of phlebitis was recorded. Only 57 patients (2.5%) had an
adverse event other than metallic taste; 7 of these reactions were anaphylactoid
reaction to the IV iron, of these 5 were classed as “serious” because the
patients were administered hydrocortisone (100 mg), chlorpheniramine (10 mg),
and metoclopramide (10 mg); however, no patient required hospitalization. The
anaphylactoid reactions were characterized by symptomatic hypotension, patients
had nausea, 2 patients experienced vomiting, 1 patient experienced headache and
1 patient had a transient loss of vision. In the 2 patients with “nonserious”
anaphylactoid reactions the symptoms resolved naturally after 10-20 minutes. All
7 patients were rechallenged with 200 mg IV iron given as a 2 hour infusion and
no adverse events were reported. The remaining 50 adverse events were: pain
during injections (n = 31), pain after injection with or without bruising (n =
9), nausea, with or without gastrointestinal symptoms (n = 3), lethargy (n = 4),
lightheadedness (n = 3).
Conclusion
The authors conclude that not only is this protocol safe but
there are enormous benefits including cost and timesavings. With regard to cost
savings of the two?minute push compared with a two?hour infusion dissolved in
100 mL of saline, the two?minute push requires no expenditure on saline or
administration tubing. The total cost saving during the study period was over
US$5,007. Time savings were also reported: the infusion requires two hours to
deliver and 15 minutes to prepare the iron, dissolve it in saline and dispose of
equipment. The two?minute push can be prepared in three minutes. A total of five
minutes is required compared with 135 minutes for IV iron infusion. This
corresponds to a time saving of 6.9 months over the period of study (period of
study not known).
Key Points
· A butterfly cannula can be used to
administer 200 mg of IV iron sucrose as an undiluted bolus injection over 2
minutes to nonhemodialysis CKD patients.
· 2,297 injections of IV iron sucrose were
administered to 657 patients.
· In 412 injections (17.9%), patients noted
a metallic taste.
· Upon the second injection, 97.5% of
patients reported that they had had an otherwise uneventful first injection
without reactions or side effects.
· No case of phlebitis was
recorded.
· A total of 57 patients (2.5%) had an
adverse event other than metallic taste.
· A total of 7 patients experienced
anaphylactoid reactions to IV iron sucrose, 5 of which were classed as serious
but not requiring hospitalization. After being rechallenged with 200 mg IV iron
given as a 2-hour infusion, no adverse events were reported in these
patients.
· Other adverse events (n = 50) were pain
during or after injection, nausea, lethargy, and lightheadedness.
· The cost saving of using a 2-minute IV
iron push compared to infusion was calculated as being US$ 5,007.
· The time saving of administering IV iron
as a bolus injection over 2 minutes rather than a 135-minute infusion
corresponded to a saving of 6.9 months.
Limitations
· Study period is not mentioned; it would
be interesting to know over what time period the cost savings
correspond.
· The efficacy of IV iron was not
assessed.
|