Trial reportAlimentary pharmacology & therapeutics2019
Randomised clinical trial: intravenous vs oral iron for the treatment of anaemia after acute gastrointestinal bleeding.
Trial report in Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to 2 registered trials, which are not on this map. Cited by 12 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Intravenous Ferric Carboxymaltose Versus Oral Ferrous Sulfate Replacement in Anaemia Due to Acute Nonvariceal Gastrointestinal Bleeding (FIERCE): Protocol of a Multicentre Randomised Controlled Trial
Intravenous Ferric Derisomaltose for Moderate to Severe Anemia Due to Uterine Bleeding in the Emergency Department: a Randomized Trial
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Risk of Infection Associated With Administration of Intravenous Iron: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.JAMA network open · 2021Pooled it
- Randomised clinical trial: intravenous vs oral iron for the treatment of anaemia after acute gastrointestinal bleeding.Alimentary pharmacology & therapeutics · 2019Trial
- Intravenous Versus Oral Iron After Gastrointestinal Bleeding: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.JGH open : an open access journal of gastroenterology and hepatology · 2025Review
- Low Rates of Diagnosis and Treatment of Iron Deficiency Anemia After an Acute Severe Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage.Digestive diseases and sciences · 2025Article
- Low Rates of Diagnosis and Treatment of Iron Deficiency Anemia After an Acute Severe Gastrointestinal Hemorrhage.Research square · 2024Article
- Novel Challenges and Opportunities for Anesthesia and Perioperative Care in Microvascular Flap Surgery: A Narrative Review.Clinics and practice · 2024Review
- Outpatient management of obscure gastrointestinal bleeding: A new perspective in high-risk patients.World journal of gastroenterology · 2024Article
- Describing and Comparing Patient Factors Associated with Use of Parenteral Iron before and after Implementation of an Order Set for Parenteral Iron (DECODE IRON).The Canadian journal of hospital pharmacy · 2024Article
- Article
- IntravenousBMJ open · 2023Article
- Indications and hemoglobin thresholds for red blood cell transfusion and iron replacement in adults with gastrointestinal bleeding: An algorithm proposed by gastroenterologists and patient blood management experts.Frontiers in medicine · 2022Review
- Efficacy and Safety of Treatment With Ferric Carboxymaltose in Patients With Cirrhosis and Gastrointestinal Bleeding.Frontiers in medicine · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAcute gastrointestinal bleeding is prevalent condition and iron deficiency anaemia is a common comorbidity, yet anaemia treatment guidelines for affected patients are lacking.
aimTo compare efficacy and safety of intravenous ferric carboxymaltose (FCM) and oral ferrous sulphate (FeSulf) in patients with anaemia secondary to non-variceal gastrointestinal bleeding
methodsA prospective 42-day study randomised 61 patients with haemoglobin <10 g/dL upon discharge (Day 0) to receive FCM (n = 29; Day 0: 1000 mg, Day 7: 500 or 1000 mg; per label) or FeSulf (n = 32; 325 mg/12 hours for 6 weeks). Outcome measures were assessed on Days 0 (baseline), 7, 21 and 42. The primary outcome was complete response (haemoglobin ≥12 g/dL [women], ≥13 g/dL [men]) after 6 weeks.
resultsA higher proportion of complete response was observed in the FCM vs the FeSulf group at Days 21 (85.7% vs 45.2%; P = 0.001) and 42 (100% vs 61.3%; P < 0.001). Additionally, the percentage of patients with partial response (haemoglobin increment ≥2 g/dL from baseline) was significantly higher in the FCM vs the FeSulf group (Day 21:100% vs 67.7%; P = 0.001, Day 42:100% vs 74.2%; P = 0.003). At Day 42, normalisation of transferrin saturation to 25% or greater was observed in 76.9% of FCM vs 24.1% of FeSulf-treated patients (P < 0.001). No patient in the FCM group reported any adverse event vs 10 patients in the FeSulf group.
conclusionFCM provided greater and faster Hb increase and iron repletion, and was better tolerated than FeSulf in patients with iron deficiency anaemia secondary to non-variceal acute gastrointestinal bleeding.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.