While the analysis, according to Dr. Govindappagari, has merit, she and her team did not have access to relevant blinded, randomly controlled trials, which may have affected the findings. Maternal and neonatal outcomes were also not included in any of the studies analyzed, nor was a cost analysis of the financial burden of switching from oral to intravenous treatment.
Despite these limitations, Dr. Govindappagari and her colleagues assert the use of intravenous iron could have a significant effect on this problem.
“Intravenous iron compared to oral iron has a higher number reach target, a greater increase in hemoglobin, and has fewer side effects,” Dr. Govindappagari said to attendees. “This could be particularly useful in women in labor, during the third trimester, and women who are iron deficient and are at risk for postpartum hemorrhage.”
Dr. Govindappagari and her colleagues reported no relevant financial disclosures.
SOURCE: Govindappagari S et al. ACOG 2018, Abstract 10OP.