Comparative Study of Oral versus Intravenous Iron Therapy in the Management of Iron Deficiency Anemia

Introduction: Iron deficiency anemia (IDA) is a common hematological disorder with significant health implications, especially in low-resource settings. It affects physical performance, cognition, and overall quality of life. Objective: To compare the hematologic response, iron store repletion, symptom improvement, and adverse effects of oral versus intravenous iron therapy in patients with IDA. Methodology: From 10 March 2023 to 10 March 2024, a 12-month comparative A cross-sectional study was conducted at the Lady Reading Hospital's Department of Medicine in Peshawar. Two groups of 136 patients with proven IDA were randomly assigned to receive oral ferrous sulfate (Group A) and intravenous iron sucrose (Group B). Over the course of eight weeks, hematologic and biochemical markers, symptom improvement, and side effects were evaluated. SPSS version 25 was employed to examine the information using chi-square and t-tests. Results: At 8 weeks, Group B showed a significantly higher increase in hemoglobin(12.4 ± 1.2 g/dL) than Group A (10.7 ± 1.3 g/dL) (p < 0.001). Ferritin and transferrin saturation were also higher in Group B (110.6 ± 18.4 ng/mL, 34.5 ± 6.2%) than in Group A (29.8 ± 9.2 ng/mL, 18.7 ± 4.5%) (p < 0.001). Fatigue improved in 86.8% vs. 57.4%, pallor in 80.9% vs. 48.5%, and dyspnea in 77.9% vs. 44.1%. GI side effects like nausea (30.9% vs. 5.9%) were more common in the oral group. Conclusion: Intravenous iron therapy is more effective and better tolerated than oral iron for the treatment of IDA, offering faster hematologic recovery and greater symptom improvement.