Open AccessPerioperative intravenous iron to treat patients with fractured hip surgery: A systematic review and meta‐analysis
Author(s) -
Sinclair Rhona C. F.,
Bowman Miranda J. A.,
Moppett Iain K.,
Gillies Michael A.
Publication year - 2022
Publication title -
health science reports
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.462
H-Index - 7
ISSN - 2398-8835
DOI - 10.1002/hsr2.633
Subject(s) - medicine , intravenous iron , hip fracture , randomized controlled trial , perioperative , meta analysis , anemia , confidence interval , cochrane library , blood transfusion , surgery , relative risk , tranexamic acid , cohort study , iron deficiency , blood loss , osteoporosis
Background Treatment of preoperative anemia with intravenous iron is common within elective surgical care pathways. It is plausible that this treatment may improve care for people with hip fractures many of whom are anemic because of pre‐existing conditions, fractures, and surgery. Objective To review the evidence for intravenous iron administration on outcomes after hip fracture. Design We followed a predefined protocol and conducted a systematic review and meta‐analysis of the use of intravenous iron to treat anemia before and after emergency hip fracture surgery. The planned primary outcome was a difference in length of stay between those treated with intravenous iron and the control group. Other outcomes analyzed were 30‐day mortality, requirement for blood transfusion, changes in quality of life, and hemoglobin concentration on discharge from the hospital. Data Sources EMBASE, MEDLINE, The Cochrane Library (CENTRAL, DARE) databases, Clinicaltrials.gov , and ISRCTN trial registries. Date of final search March 2022. Eligibility Criteria Adult patients undergoing urgent surgery for hip fracture. Studies considered patients who received intravenous iron and were compared with a control group. Results Four randomized controlled trials (RCT, 732 patients) and nine cohort studies (2986 patients) were included. The RCTs were at low risk of bias, and the nonrandomized studies were at moderate risk of bias. After metanalysis of the RCTs there was no significant difference in the primary outcome, length of hospital stay, between the control group and patients receiving intravenous iron (mean difference: −0.59, 95% confidence interval [CI]; −1.20 to 0.03; I 2 = 30%, p = 0.23). Intravenous iron was not associated with a difference in 30‐day mortality ( n = 732, OR: 1.14, 95% CI: 0.62−2.1; I 2 = 0%, p = 0.50), nor with the requirement for transfusion ( n = 732, OR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.63−1.14; I 2 = 0%, p < 0.01) in the analyzed RCTs. Functional outcomes and quality of life were variably reported in three studies. Conclusion The evidence on the use of intravenous iron in patients with hip fracture is low quality and shows no difference in length of acute hospital stay and transfusion requirements in this population. Improved large, multicentre, high‐quality studies with patient‐centered outcomes will be required to evaluate the clinical and cost‐effectiveness of this treatment.