Iron Therapy for Anemia in Diverse Populations: An Umbrella Review of Systematic Reviews
Clicks: 1
ID: 314157
2026
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
0.0
/100
1 views
0 readers
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
Ranked #246 of 254 articles by views in Yemen Journal of Medicine
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale. Only the 120 most-read articles are drawn; the journal has 254 in total.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Iron deficiency anemia is a common condition seen in several demographics, including the general population, those with chronic kidney disease (CKD), those with acute kidney injury (AKI), patients dependent on dialysis, and kidney transplant recipients. This umbrella review synthesizes data only from published systematic reviews and meta-analyses to evaluate the efficacy and safety of iron therapy for chronic and acute anemia in these populations. The evaluation compared intravenous (IV) and oral iron supplementation, concentrating on hemoglobin response, cardiovascular outcomes, and related comorbidities. Data from 45 systematic reviews and meta-analyses demonstrate that in the general population, alternate-day oral iron has equivalent efficacy to daily dosing, while resulting in fewer adverse effects. The evidence for iron therapy in AKI is limited and suggests potential negative consequences from supplementation, while chelation may provide therapeutic benefits. Still, high-quality data on AKI are lacking. IV iron is often more efficacious than oral iron in elevating Hb levels, particularly in patients with CKD and those receiving dialysis, with risk ratios for achieving target Hb levels ranging from 1.23 to 1.71. Iron supplementation after transplantation enhances anemia; nonetheless, appropriate procedures remain undetermined. In terms of safety, IV presents a risk of hypersensitive reactions (relative risk [RR], 3.56 [95% CI, 1.88–6.74]) in contrast to oral iron. However, the absolute risk with modern formulations is low (0.1%–0.5%). Conversely, oral iron is linked to gastrointestinal side effects; IV iron reduces gastrointestinal events by 53% compared to oral iron (RR, 0.47 [95% CI, 0.33–0.66]). IV iron decreases hospitalizations for heart failure (RR, 0.77) in CKD, while it may increase the risk of serious adverse events under certain conditions. Therefore, it can be concluded that there is a need for personalized iron therapy to improve both efficacy and safety. Future research should prioritize high-quality trials in AKI and standardized protocols in transplantation.
| Reference Key |
habas2026therapy
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | Elmukhtar Habas, Aml Habas, Hafedh Ghazouani, Ala Habas, Eshrak Habas, Amnna Rayani |
| Journal | Yemen Journal of Medicine |
| Year | 2026 |
| DOI |
10.63475/yjm.v5i1.0296
|
| URL | |
| Keywords | Keywords not found |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.