Risk of Serious Adverse Gastrointestinal Events with Potassium Binders in Hospitalized Patients: A National Study.

BACKGROUND: Concerns about serious adverse gastrointestinal (GI) events with sodium polystyrene sulfonate (SPS) led to development of two new potassium binders, patiromer and sodium zirconium cyclosilicate (SZC), for treatment of hyperkalemia. OBJECTIVE: To compare risk of intestinal ischemia/thrombosis or other serious GI events associated with SPS, patiromer, or SZC in hospitalized patients. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. PARTICIPANTS: National sample of 3,144,960 veterans hospitalized 2016-2022 in the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Healthcare System. MAIN MEASURES: Demographics, comorbidities, medications and outcomes were ascertained from the VA Corporate Data Warehouse. Exposures were SPS, patiromer, SZC. Outcomes were 30-day intestinal ischemia/thrombosis, and a composite of intestinal ischemia/thrombosis, peptic ulcer/perforation or bowel resection/ostomy. KEY RESULTS: Potassium binders were used during 39,270 (1.3%) hospitalizations: SPS = 30,040 (1.0%), patiromer = 3,750 (0.1%), and SZC = 5,520 (0.2%). Intestinal ischemia/thrombosis occurred with 106/30,040 (0.4%) SPS, 12/3750 (0.3%) patiromer and 24/5520 (0.4%) SZC, vs. 6998/3,105,650 (0.2%) without potassium binder. Adjusted odds ratios (aOR) were 1.40 [95% CI, 1.16 to 1.69] with SPS, 1.36 [CI, 0.79 to 2.36] with patiromer, and 1.78 [CI, 1.21 to 2.63] with SZC exposures. Composite GI adverse events occurred with 754/30,040 (2.5%) SPS, 96/3750 (2.6%) patiromer, 2.6% SZC, vs. 144/5520 (2.4%) without binder; aOR were 1.00 [CI, 0.94 to 1.08] with SPS, 1.08 [CI, 0.89 to 1.32] with patiromer, and 1.08 [CI, 0.93 to 1.27] with SZC exposures. No statistical difference in intestinal ischemia/thrombosis between each new agent and SPS was seen (p = 0.274 for SPS vs. SZC; p = 0.916 for SPS vs. patiromer). CONCLUSION: Risk of intestinal ischemia/thrombosis or other serious adverse GI events was low and did not differ across three potassium-binding drugs.

Variation in Specialist Palliative Care Reach and Associated Factors Among People With Advanced Heart Failure in the Department of Veterans Affairs.

CONTEXT: Clinical practice guidelines recommend palliative care for people with advanced heart failure (aHF), yet it remains underutilized. OBJECTIVES: We examined medical center variation in specialist palliative care (SPC) and identified factors associated with variation among people with aHF. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of 21,654 people with aHF who received healthcare in 83 Veterans Affairs Medical Centers (VAMCs) from 2018-2020. We defined aHF with ICD-9/10 codes and hospitalizations. We used random intercept multilevel logistic regression to derive SPC reach (i.e., predicted probability) for each VAMC adjusting for demographic and clinical characteristics. We then examined VAMC-level SPC delivery characteristics associated with predicted SPC reach including the availability of outpatient SPC (proportion of outpatient consultations), cardiology involvement (number of outpatient cardiology-initiated referrals), and earlier SPC (days from aHF identification to consultation). RESULTS: Of the sample the mean age = 72.9+/-10.9 years, 97.9% were male, 61.6% were White, and 32.2% were Black. The predicted SPC reach varied substantially across VAMCs from 9% to 57% (mean: 28% [95% Confidence Interval: 25%-30%]). Only the availability of outpatient SPC was independently associated with higher SPC reach. VAMCs, in which outpatient delivery made up the greatest share of SPC consultations (9% or higher) had 11% higher rates of SPC reach relative to VAMCs with a lower proportion of outpatient SPC. CONCLUSION: SPC reach varies widely across VAMCs for people with aHF. Outpatient palliative is common among high-reach VAMCs but its role in reach warrants further investigation. Strategies used by high-reach VAMCs may be potential targets to test for implementation and dissemination.