Iron absorption and iron status in patients with chronic uremia on regular peritoneal dialysis

Is Absorption of High-Dose Oral Iron Sufficient in Peritoneal Dialysis Patients?

Objective

Iron supplementation plays a major role in erythropoietin-treated end-stage renal disease patients. For peritoneal dialysis (PD) patients, oral iron substitution is more convenient than intravenous therapy. However, disturbed iron absorption and adverse effects may be limiting factors for oral treatment. Nevertheless, we compared the response to a high-dose and low-dose oral iron absorption test between PD patients and healthy control subjects.

Patients and Interventions

In 34 PD patients and 15 healthy control subjects, blood samples were taken at baseline as well as 2, 4, and 8 hours after oral intake of 4 tablets iron sulfate (105 mg elemental iron per tablet). In a subgroup of 6 PD patients and 6 control subjects, the oral iron absorption test was repeated using 1 tablet iron sulfate.

Results

There was no significant difference in the increase in serum iron during the test between the two groups. As known for healthy subjects, iron absorption was significantly better in PD patients with absolute iron deficiency compared to those with functional iron deficiency. Iron-repleted PD patients showed the lowest iron absorption, indicating that a high dose of oral iron did not overwhelm the ability of the bowel tract to reject unneeded iron. Increasing the oral iron dose from 1 to 4 tablets was followed by a better response in a small subgroup of PD patients compared to control subjects. Side effects such as nausea and vomiting occurred more frequently during high-dose oral iron in control subjects than in PD patients (20% vs 8.8%).

Conclusion

High-dose oral iron is well absorbed in iron-depleted PD patients. This kind of oral iron therapy should be considered in some subgroups of PD patients with iron deficiency, particularly in those patients with poor vascularization of arm veins or intolerance to intravenous iron preparations.

Chronic peritoneal dialysis in iron-deficient rats with solutions containing iron dextran

BACKGROUND

We evaluated the effects of different concentrations of iron dextran administered through the intraperitoneal route, in iron-deficient rats, on hematocrit (Hct in percentage), serum iron (mg/dL), total iron binding capacity (TIBC in mg/dL), and the function and histology of the peritoneal membrane.

METHODS

Seventy-two male Sprague-Dawley rats weighing 85 to 110 g were divided into two groups and seven subgroups. Group I consisted of rats on iron-deficient chow, and group II consisted of rats on normal chow. Both groups contained dialysis control subgroups (N = 12: IA, IID), dialyzed with Dianeal solution, and tissue control subgroups (N = 6: IE, IIN), in which rats were not dialyzed and catheters were not implanted. Study group I contained the following study subgroups (N = 12): (B) rats dialyzed with Dianeal solution containing 2 mg/L of iron dextran and (C) rats dialyzed with Dianeal solution containing 1 mg/L of iron dextran. Group IID was dialyzed with Dianeal solution containing 2 mg/dL of iron dextran. Study duration was 12 weeks with peritoneal equilibration tests (PETs) performed at baseline, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks. Prior to baseline, rats were placed on iron-deficient chow or normal chow for three weeks. Dialysis was performed with three 25 mL volume exchanges per day. Hematocrit (Hct), serum iron (Fe), and total iron binding capacity (TIBC) were determined for each study interval. After the final PET, the animals were sacrificed, and the peritoneal membrane was evaluated by gross inspection and light microscopy.

RESULTS

Rats on an iron-deficient diet developed severe iron-deficiency anemia after three weeks of the diet (Hct 27; Fe 21 to 23; TIBC 799 to 806). After 12 weeks, the rats remained anemic in groups A (Hct 34 +/- 0.9; Fe 16 +/- 2; TIBC 998 +/- 27) and IE (Hct 38 +/- 2.7), whereas the rats corrected anemia in group B (Hct 45.8 +/- 1.8; Fe 115 +/- 15; TIBC 546 +/- 77). The results were not significantly different from those of group IID (Hct 47.1 +/- 1.6; Fe 94 +/- 19; TIBC 516 +/- 46). In group C, Hct (44.8 +/- 2.1) and Fe (94 +/- 19) did not differ significantly from group IID, but TIBC (734 +/- 76) remained significantly higher than that in the group IID. Peritoneal iron deposits were not detected. The morphometric analysis of the submesothelial space did not reveal any difference in thickness between dialysis groups. PETs were not significantly different among groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Intraperitoneal iron dextran supplementation in concentrations of 2 mg/L of dialysis solution is nontoxic to the peritoneum and effective in correcting iron deficiency in rats maintained on an iron-deficient diet. Iron dextran in concentration of 1 mg/L of dialysis solution may be sufficient for correcting a lesser degree of iron deficiency.

Iron status and iron supplementation in peritoneal dialysis patients

Iron deficiency represents an important problem in peritoneal dialysis patients, especially during erythropoietin therapy. A combination of serum ferritin, transferrin saturation, and/or the percentage of hypochromic red cells should be used to assess iron status in peritoneal dialysis patients. Primarily, oral iron supplementation should be the preferred therapy. However, most of the studies using oral substitution in erythropoietin-treated peritoneal dialysis patients show a progressive decline of serum ferritin. Therefore, parenteral iron supplementation is required in part of the patients, and the intravenous route should be preferred in these cases. Intravenous iron therapy is recommended if serum ferritin falls below 100 microg/liter and should be stopped if the serum ferritin level is more than 650 microg/liter. The optimal form of intravenous iron supplementation is still unclear. Injections once to three times per week restrict the patients' flexibility, but application of higher doses in longer intervals may lead to an impairment of neutrophil functions, probably connected to a higher risk of infection. We treated 17 stable peritoneal dialysis patients with 100 or 200 mg iron saccharate monthly over a period of six months and found an increase of transferrin saturation (from 12.1+/-1.6 to 20.9+/-2.4%, P = 0.026), serum ferritin (from 100.4+/-32.0 to 372.4+/-54.6 microg/liter, NS) and hematocrit (from 32.0+/-0.8% to 35.1+/-0.9%, P = 0.099). The required erythropoietin dosage could be reduced significantly (from 148.4+/-30.3 to 69.4+/-19.5 U/kg/week, P = 0.025). Side effects occurred in 0.9% after application of 100 mg and in 5.9% after injection of 200 mg iron saccharate. The incidence of catheter infections and peritonitis was the same in the period before and after the start of treatment. Further studies are needed to find the most suitable regime of iron supplementation for peritoneal dialysis patients.