Michels Wieneke M, Jaar Bernard G, Ephraim Patti L, Liu Yang, Miskulin Dana C, Tangri Navdeep, Crews Deidra C, Scialla Julia J, Shafi Tariq, Sozio Stephen M, Bandeen-Roche Karen, Cook Courtney J, Meyer Klemens B, Boulware L Ebony
Division of Nephrology, Department of Medicine, Academic Medical Center, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Division of General Internal Medicine, Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Nephrol Dial Transplant. 2017 Jan 1;32(1):173-181. doi: 10.1093/ndt/gfw316.
The effect of maintenance intravenous (IV) iron administration on subsequent achievement of anemia management goals and mortality among patients recently initiating hemodialysis is unclear.
We performed an observational cohort study, in adult incident dialysis patients starting on hemodialysis. We defined IV administration strategies over a 12-week period following a patient's initiation of hemodialysis; all those receiving IV iron at regular intervals were considered maintenance, and all others were considered non-maintenance. We used multivariable models adjusting for demographics, clinical and treatment parameters, iron dose, measures of iron stores and pro-infectious and pro-inflammatory parameters to compare these strategies. The outcomes under study were patients' (i) achievement of hemoglobin (Hb) of 10-12 g/dL, (ii) more than 25% reduction in mean weekly erythropoietin stimulating agent (ESA) dose and (iii) mortality, ascertained over a period of 4 weeks following the iron administration period.
Maintenance IV iron was administered to 4511 patients and non-maintenance iron to 8458 patients. Maintenance IV iron administration was not associated with a higher likelihood of achieving an Hb between 10 and 12 g/dL {adjusted odds ratio (OR) 1.01 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.93-1.09]} compared with non-maintenance, but was associated with a higher odds of achieving a reduced ESA dose of 25% or more [OR 1.33 (95% CI 1.18-1.49)] and lower mortality [hazard ratio (HR) 0.73 (95% CI 0.62-0.86)].
Maintenance IV iron strategies were associated with reduced ESA utilization and improved early survival but not with the achievement of Hb targets.
维持性静脉注射铁剂对近期开始血液透析的患者后续实现贫血管理目标及死亡率的影响尚不清楚。
我们对开始进行血液透析的成年新发透析患者开展了一项观察性队列研究。我们定义了患者开始血液透析后12周内的静脉注射策略;所有定期接受静脉注射铁剂的患者被视为维持治疗,其他所有患者被视为非维持治疗。我们使用多变量模型,对人口统计学、临床和治疗参数、铁剂剂量、铁储备指标以及促感染和促炎参数进行调整,以比较这些策略。所研究的结局包括患者(i)血红蛋白(Hb)达到10 - 12 g/dL,(ii)平均每周促红细胞生成素刺激剂(ESA)剂量降低超过25%,以及(iii)在铁剂给药期后的4周内确定的死亡率。
4511例患者接受维持性静脉注射铁剂,8458例患者接受非维持性铁剂治疗。与非维持治疗相比,维持性静脉注射铁剂与Hb达到10至12 g/dL的可能性较高无关(调整后的优势比[OR]为1.01 [95%置信区间(CI) 0.93 - 1.09]),但与ESA剂量降低25%或更多的较高优势相关[OR 1.33 (95% CI 1.18 - 1.49)],且死亡率较低[风险比(HR) 0.73 (95% CI 0.62 - 0.86)]。
维持性静脉注射铁剂策略与降低ESA利用率和改善早期生存相关,但与Hb目标的实现无关。