Abstract:Intravenous iron is increasingly used to treat iron‐deficient anaemia (IDA) in pregnancy. A previous network meta‐analysis suggested that intravenous irons have a greater effect on haematological parameters than oral irons; however, the impact on serious pregnancy complications such as postpartum haemorrhage (PPH) or the need for blood transfusion was unclear. Since then, several new randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have been conducted. To evaluate the effect and safety of intravenous versus oral iron preparations for treating IDA in pregnancy. We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and two trial registries (ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO ICTRP) for eligible studies. The latest search was performed on 19 March 2024. We included RCTs in pregnant women with confirmed IDA (haemoglobin (Hb) level < 11 g/dL as per World Health Organization (WHO) criteria) comparing intravenous (iron sucrose, ferric carboxymaltose, ferric derisomaltose, ferumoxytol) and oral (ferrous sulfate, ferrous fumarate, ferrous gluconate) iron preparations. Our outcomes were antenatal and postnatal Hb levels, antenatal and postnatal anaemia status, PPH, blood transfusion, maternal satisfaction, maternal well‐being, breastfeeding, maternal mortality, maternal morbidity, and adverse events (AEs). We used the Cochrane RoB 1 tool to assess risk of bias in the included RCTs. We followed standard Cochrane methods. Two review authors independently assessed studies for eligibility and scientific rigour, evaluated the risk of bias of included studies, and extracted data. Where appropriate, we pooled data using a fixed‐effect model in the first instance. We reported dichotomous data as risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) and continuous data as mean differences (MDs) with 95% CIs. We assessed the certainty of the evidence using the GRADE approach. We included 13 RCTs (3939 participants) mainly conducted in India and Africa (8/13). Gestational age at baseline ranged from 13 to 37 weeks, and Hb levels ranged from 5.0 to just below 11.0 g/dL. The most frequently compared preparations were intravenous iron sucrose versus oral ferrous sulfate (5/13). Most RCTs were at low risk of bias, and the certainty of evidence ranged from moderate to very low, mainly due to concerns over attrition bias, imprecision, and inconsistency. Antenatal outcomes Compared with oral iron, intravenous iron likely slightly increases Hb level three to six weeks after treatment start (MD 0.49, 95% CI 0.28 to 0.69; 11 RCTs; 2935 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence ) and likely reduces anaemia status three to six weeks after treatment start (RR 0.81, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.86; 5 RCTs; 2189 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence ). Compared with oral iron, intravenous iron likely slightly increases Hb level around birth (MD 0.55, 95% CI 0.33 to 0.77; 6 RCTs; 1574 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence ) and likely reduces anaemia status around birth (RR 0.85, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.93; 4 RCTs; 1240 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence ). Postpartum outcomes Compared with oral iron, intravenous iron may slightly increase Hb level postpartum (MD 0.54, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.68; 3 RCTs; 1950 participants; low‐certainty evidence ). It may also reduce anaemia status (RR 0.66, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.73; 3 RCTs; 1950 participants; low‐certainty evidence ) and severe anaemia postpartum (RR 0.16, 95% CI 0.03 to 0.84; 2 RCTs; 1581 participants; very low‐certainty evidence ), although the evidence for the latter outcome is very uncertain. Compared with oral iron, intravenous iron may result in little to no difference in PPH (RR 1.44, 95% CI 0.50 to 4.20; 3 RCTs; 2251 participants; low‐certainty evidence ) and likely results in little to no difference in the need for blood transfusion (RR 0.97, 95% CI 0.58 to 1.60; 6 RCTs; 2592 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence ) or rates of breastfeeding (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.12; 1 RCT; 404 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence ). No trials reported on maternal satisfaction or maternal well‐being. Adverse outcomes Compared with oral iron, intravenous iron may have little to no effect on maternal mortality, but the evidence is very uncertain (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.13 to 6.39; 4 RCTs; 2152 participants; very low‐certainty evidence ). Compared with oral iron, intravenous iron likely does not increase maternal morbidity: severe infections (RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.18; 1 RCT; 1881 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence ) and prolonged hospital stay (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.62 to 1.21; 1 RCT; 1764 participants; moderate‐certainty evidence ) and may not increase admissions to the intensive care unit (ICU) (RR 1.99, 95% CI 0.18 to 21.87; 2 RCTs; 2069 participants; low‐certainty evidence ). Compared with oral iron, intravenous iron likely does not increase AEs (RR 1.05 -Abstract Truncated-

Comparison of the Anaemia and Transfusion Rates of Pregnant Women Treated with Intravenous <em>versus</em> Oral Iron in the Third Trimester

What is the best treatment for anemia in pregnant women in the third trimester: Ferric carboxymaltose or oral iron therapy?

A comparative study of intravenous ferricarboxymaltose and double dose oral iron therapy in treatment of anemia in pregnancy

Clinical effectiveness of ferric carboxymaltose (iv) versus iron sucrose (iv) in treatment of iron deficiency anaemia in pregnancy: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Study on the changes of RBC, Hct, and Ret levels in patients with anemia during pregnancy and clinical treatment

Effect and safety of intravenous iron compared to oral iron for treatment of iron deficiency anaemia in pregnancy

COMPARATIVE BIOTECHNOLOGICAL EVALUATION OF IRON SUPPLEMENTATION MODALITIES FOR PREGNANCY-RELATED ANEMIA: INTRAVENOUS IRON SUCROSE VS. ORAL FERROUS FUMARATE AND SULFATE

Intermittent Versus Regular Daily Regimen of Antenatal Oral Iron Supplementation for Preventing Iron Deficiency Anemia During Pregnancy

Prediction of Iron Deficiency Anemia in Third Trimester of Pregnancy Based on Data in the First Trimester: A Prospective Cohort Study in a High-Income Country

Treatment of anemia using parenteral iron supplements

Intravenous versus oral iron for anaemia among pregnant women in Nigeria (IVON): an open-label, randomised controlled trial

A prospective interventional study to observe the effectiveness of parenteral iron infusion of iron isomaltoside 1000 (Fur – IV) in obstetrics and gynecology patients suffering from moderate to severe iron deficiency anaemia

Randomized clinical trial of IV iron sucrose and IV ferric carboxymaltose in the treatment of moderate iron deficiency anaemia in pregnancy

Anaemia and iron deficiency in pregnancy and adverse perinatal outcomes in Southern India

Comparison Of The Effectiveness Of Daily Versus Weekly Oral Iron Supplementation In Preventing Anemia During Pregnancy

Oral versus intravenous iron for anemia in pregnancy: a cost-effectiveness analysis

Comparing the Efficacy of Intermittent Versus Continuous Oral Iron Supplementation in Non–Anemic Pregnant Women Presenting for Routine Antenatal Care

COMPARISON OF ORAL IRON SUPPLEMENTS (FERROUS SULPHATE) V/S PARENTRAL IRON SUPPLEMENT (IRON SUCROSE) IN ANTENATAL PATIENTS AT DHIRAJ GENERAL HOSPITAL, VADODARA

Comparison of Efficacy of Ferrous Sulfate and Carbonyl Iron on the Blood Film of Iron Deficiency Anemia in Pregnant Women

Intravenous verses oral iron supplementation for anaemia of pregnancy in the arid region of Western India: a retrospective cohort study

[Effectiveness and tolerability of oral liquid ferrous gluconate in iron-deficiency anemia in pregnancy and in the immediate post-partum period: comparison with other liquid or solid formulations containing bivalent or trivalent iron]