Shahab Muhammad Hasan, Saifullah Khan Shahzeen
Internal Medicine, Memon Medical Institute Hospital, Karachi, PAK.
Paediatrics, Dr. Ruth K.M. Pfau Civil Hospital Karachi / Dow Medical College, Karachi, PAK.
Cureus. 2020 Sep 10;12(9):e10358. doi: 10.7759/cureus.10358.
The prevalence of anemia in chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients is almost twice that of the normal population and its severity increases exponentially as the disease worsens, dramatically affecting the quality of an individual's life. The advent of erythropoiesis stimulating agents (ESA) in the 1980s saw a revolutionary change in the treatment of anemia in CKD patients, drastically improving quality of life (QoL), overall health and reducing the need for blood transfusions. Numerous ESAs have been developed ever since and are in current use, with the primary routes of administration being intravenous (IV) and subcutaneous (SC) injections. Their use, however, has stirred significant controversy over the last two decades. Additionally, despite numerous studies and trials, the latest international recommendations for their use do not provide clear cut guidance with well-grounded evidence on the recommended route of administration for different sets of patients. Instead, this decision has mainly been left up to the physician's discretion, whilst keeping certain key factors in mind. This review shall summarize, discuss and compare the findings of previous studies on various factors governing the two aforementioned routes of administration and identify areas that need further exploration.
慢性肾脏病(CKD)患者贫血的患病率几乎是正常人群的两倍,且随着疾病的恶化,贫血严重程度呈指数级上升,极大地影响了个人生活质量。20世纪80年代促红细胞生成素(ESA)的出现,使CKD患者贫血的治疗发生了革命性变化,显著改善了生活质量(QoL)、整体健康状况,并减少了输血需求。从那时起,人们开发了多种ESA并应用于临床,主要给药途径为静脉注射(IV)和皮下注射(SC)。然而,在过去二十年中,它们的使用引发了重大争议。此外,尽管进行了大量研究和试验,但最新的国际使用建议并未就不同患者群体的推荐给药途径提供基于充分证据的明确指导。相反,这一决定主要由医生自行判断,同时要考虑某些关键因素。本综述将总结、讨论和比较以往关于上述两种给药途径相关各种因素的研究结果,并确定需要进一步探索的领域。