Hoppe Michael, Hulthén Lena, Hallberg Leif
Department of Clinical Nutrition, Institute of Internal Medicine, Sahlgrenska Academy at Göteborg University, 40530, Göteborg, Sweden.
Eur J Nutr. 2006 Feb;45(1):37-44. doi: 10.1007/s00394-005-0560-0. Epub 2005 Apr 25.
Bioavailability data in humans of elemental iron powders is limited although elemental iron is a common form of iron when used as a fortificant.
The relative bioavailability (RBV) of seven elemental iron powders, five commercially available and two developmental are evaluated. In addition, one commercial electrolytic iron powder given with ascorbic acid (AA) was examined.
Based on a validated method this double-blinded randomized crossover study included three groups of male blood donors (n = 3*16) who were served rolls fortified with different elemental iron powders or ferrous sulfate (FeSO(4)) nine weeks apart. Blood samples were drawn every hour for six hours. RBV was obtained by comparing the increase in serum iron concentration induced by the elemental iron with the increase induced by FeSO(4).
All elemental iron powders studied were significantly less well absorbed compared to FeSO(4). The electrolytic iron given with 50-mg AA was as well absorbed as FeSO(4) (molar ratio = 1:6, AA:Fe). The mean RBVs of the iron powders were: electrolytic (A-131, RBV = 0.65); electrolytic (Electrolytic, RBV = 0.59); carbonyl (Ferronyl, RBV = 0.58); H-reduced (AC- 325, RBV = 0.56); H-reduced (Hi-Sol, RBV = 0.50); carbonyl (CF, RBV = 0.37); reduced (Atomet 95SP, RBV = 0.36). The reduced iron was distinguished by having significantly lower RBV (0.36) although no significant overall ranking was possible.
Based on a validated method this doubleblinded cross-over study in humans showed that the evaluated elemental iron powders currently available for commercial use are significantly less well absorbed compared to FeSO(4). The results indicate that the reduced iron powder was absorbed to a lower extent compared to the other iron powders and only 36% compared to FeSO(4). Ascorbic acid seems to improve the bioavailability of elemental iron even though a rather low molar ratio is used. Thus, if confirmed, this enhancing effect of ascorbic acid on elemental iron when used as a fortificant could be used by co-fortifying them.
尽管元素铁粉作为一种常用的铁强化剂形式,但关于其在人体中的生物利用度数据有限。
评估七种元素铁粉的相对生物利用度(RBV),其中五种为市售产品,两种为研发产品。此外,还对一种与抗坏血酸(AA)一起服用的市售电解铁粉进行了研究。
基于一种经过验证的方法,这项双盲随机交叉研究纳入了三组男性献血者(n = 3×16),他们每隔九周食用添加不同元素铁粉或硫酸亚铁(FeSO₄)的面包卷。每小时采集血样,共采集六小时。通过比较元素铁引起的血清铁浓度升高与FeSO₄引起的升高来获得RBV。
与FeSO₄相比,所有研究的元素铁粉吸收效果均明显较差。与50毫克AA一起服用的电解铁吸收效果与FeSO₄相同(摩尔比 = 1:6,AA:Fe)。铁粉的平均RBV分别为:电解铁(A - 131,RBV = 0.65);电解铁(Electrolytic,RBV = 0.59);羰基铁(Ferronyl,RBV = 0.58);氢还原铁(AC - 325,RBV = 0.56);氢还原铁(Hi - Sol,RBV = 0.50);羰基铁(CF,RBV = 0.37);还原铁(Atomet 95SP,RBV = 0.36)。还原铁的RBV显著较低(0.36),尽管无法进行显著的总体排名。
基于一种经过验证的方法,这项针对人类的双盲交叉研究表明,与FeSO₄相比,目前市售的评估元素铁粉吸收效果明显较差。结果表明,还原铁粉的吸收程度低于其他铁粉,与FeSO₄相比仅为36%。抗坏血酸似乎能提高元素铁 的生物利用度,即使使用的摩尔比相当低。因此,如果得到证实,抗坏血酸对用作强化剂的元素铁的这种增强作用可通过共同强化来利用。