Minerva Gastroenterol (Torino). 2022 Mar;68(1):111-118.doi: 10.23736/S2724-5985.20.02819-6. Epub 2020 Dec 3.

Rocco Spagnuolo ¹, Ludovico Abenavoli ², Tiziana Larussa ³, Chiara Iannelli ³, Rinaldo Pellicano ⁴, Sharmila Fagoonee ⁵, Patrizia Doldo ¹, Francesco Luzza ³

Author information

¹Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, "Magna Graecia" University, Catanzaro, Italy.

²Department of Health Sciences, "Magna Graecia" University, Catanzaro, Italy - l.abenavoli@unicz.it.

³Department of Health Sciences, "Magna Graecia" University, Catanzaro, Italy.

⁴Unit of Gastroenterology, Molinette Hospital, Città della Salute e della Scienza, Turin, Italy.

⁵Institute of Biostructure and Bioimaging, National Research Council, Molecular Biotechnology Center, Turin, Italy.

Abstract

Up to 30-70% of patients may experience mild and moderate side effects during iron therapy and this is often associated with a poor adherence to therapy. Anemia is frequent in patients with active inflammatory bowel disease (IBD), due to both iron deficiency and chronic inflammation, therefore iron supplementation is frequently needed. Considering that gastrointestinal disorders are the most common side effects with oral iron, in IBD patients intravenous administration must be preferred. Although intravenous iron supplementation remains the most effective therapy of IBD-associated iron deficiency anemia, the perception of risk related to intravenous administration by clinicians could limit this successful strategy. In this narrative review we provided an up to date on the safety of the different iron formulations for intravenous administration, by reporting the most recent studies in IBD patients.