Background: Intravenous (IV) iron therapy is performed in community practices and hospitals with modern formulations when oral administration becomes impractical. Effective replacement of iron is important for the treatment of iron deficiency and anemia. Can IV iron be rechallenged in individuals with a history of adverse reactions? This review is to explore the challenge of this, when clinically indicated. Methods: After performing a literature search, five studies (combined total sample number=1,006) for re-exposure of IV iron to individuals with a history of past reactions were identified, observed, and analyzed. Re-exposure included reactions ranging from mild to moderate and few cases of severe type. Results: The majority (>80%) of IV iron rechallenges were tolerable, safe, and successful without major serious incidents. There were no reports of major reactions (severe hypersensitivity reactions or anaphylaxis) in these re-exposures. Conclusion Re-administration of IV iron therapy in patients with a previous adverse reaction is plausible, with benefit and risk stratification. A rechallenge would depend on the nature and degree of the adverse reaction and use of alternative formulations. Rechallenge to a previous severe hypersensitivity reaction or anaphylaxis with the same product has not been reported in these studies. Evidence on the benefit of premedication use is conflicting and requires further studies.

Objective. This study determined the relationship between plasma adiponectin level and corrected QT interval (QTc) in smokers and non-smokers. Methodology.This cross-sectional analytical study was undertaken in 30 smokers and 30 non-smokers. Plasma adiponectin level was determined by enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA). The QT interval was measured by routine 12-lead ECG with Lead II rhythm and QTc was calculated. Results. Mean plasma adiponectin level was significantly lower in smokers (27.89±15 μg/ml) than that of non-smokers (52.13±21.57μg/ml) (p<0.001). Mean QTc interval was significantly longer in smokers than that of non-smokers (415.37±29.9 versus 395.63±26.13 ms, p<0.01). Higher risk of low adiponectin level (odds ratio [OR],8.1; 95% confidence interval [CI],1.61-40.77) and QTc interval prolongation (OR,6; 95%CI,1.17-30.73) were observed in smokers. There was weak significant negative correlation between plasma adiponectin level and QTc interval in the study population (n=60, r=-0.407, p=0.001). Moreover, low plasma adiponectin level was significantly associated with prolonged QTc interval in the study population (n=60, Fisher's exact p value<0.05). Risk of QTc interval prolongation was 4.3 times higher in subjects with low plasma adiponectin level (OR,4.27; 95% CI,1.05-17.46). Conclusion. Smokers have greater risk for low plasma adiponectin level and prolonged QTc interval. There is a relationship between plasma adiponectin level and QTc interval.
Smokers ; adiponectin