PDI
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
 QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     


Perit Dial Int 20(6): 667-673 2000
© 2000 International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Dittrich, E
Right arrow Articles by Vychytil, A
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Dittrich, E
Right arrow Articles by Vychytil, A
Peritoneal Dialysis International, Vol 20, Issue 6, 667-673
Copyright © 2000 by International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis


Articles

Is absorption of high-dose oral iron sufficient in peritoneal dialysis patients?

E Dittrich, H Puttinger, B Schneider, WH Horl, M Haag-Weber, and A Vychytil

Department of Medicine III, University Hospital of Vienna, Austria.

OBJECTIVE: Iron supplementation plays a major role in erythropoietin-treated end-stage renal disease patients. For peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients, oral iron substitution is more convenient than intravenous therapy. However, disturbed iron absorption and adverse effects may be limiting factors for oral treatment. Nevertheless, we compared the response to a high-dose and low-dose oral iron absorption test between PD patients and healthy control subjects. PATIENTS AND INTERVENTIONS: In 34 PD patients and 15 healthy control subjects, blood samples were taken at baseline as well as 2, 4, and 8 hours after oral intake of 4 tablets iron sulfate (105 mg elemental iron per tablet). In a subgroup of 6 PD patients and 6 control subjects, the oral iron absorption test was repeated using 1 tablet iron sulfate. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the increase in serum iron during the test between the two groups. As known for healthy subjects, iron absorption was significantly better in PD patients with absolute iron deficiency compared to those with functional iron deficiency. Iron-repleted PD patients showed the lowest iron absorption, indicating that a high dose of oral iron did not overwhelm the ability of the bowel tract to reject unneeded iron. Increasing the oral iron dose from 1 to 4 tablets was followed by a better response in a small subgroup of PD patients compared to control subjects. Side effects such as nausea and vomiting occurred more frequently during high-dose oral iron in control subjects than in PD patients (20% vs 8.8%). CONCLUSION: High-dose oral iron is well absorbed in iron-depleted PD patients. This kind of oral iron therapy should be considered in some subgroups of PD patients with iron deficiency, particularly in those patients with poor vascularization of arm veins or intolerance to intravenous iron preparations.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
J. Am. Soc. Nephrol.Home page
W. H. Horl
Clinical Aspects of Iron Use in the Anemia of Kidney Disease
J. Am. Soc. Nephrol., February 1, 2007; 18(2): 382 - 393.
[Full Text] [PDF]




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Multimed Inc. logo
Copyright © 2000 by Multimed Inc.