Hyperkalemia treatment standard.

Hyperkalemia is a common electrolyte disturbance in both inpatient and outpatient clinical practice. The severity and associated risk depends on the underlying cause and rate of potassium (K+) increase. Acute hyperkalemia requires immediate attention due to potentially life-threatening manifestations resulting from the rapid increase in plasma K+ concentration. Treatment is initially focused on stabilizing the cardiac membrane, followed by maneuvers to shift K+ into the cells, and ultimately initiating strategies to decrease total body K+ content. Chronic hyperkalemia develops over a more extended period of time and manifestations tend to be less severe. Nevertheless, the disorder is not benign since chronic hyperkalemia is associated with increased morbidity and mortality. The approach to patients with chronic hyperkalemia begins with a review of medications potentially responsible for the disorder, ensuring effective diuretic therapy and correcting metabolic acidosis if present. The practice of restricting foods high in K+ to manage hyperkalemia is being reassessed since the evidence supporting the effectiveness of this strategy is lacking. Rather, dietary restriction should be more nuanced, focusing on reducing the intake of nonplant sources of K+. Down-titration and/or discontinuation of renin-angiotensin-aldosterone inhibitors should be discouraged since these drugs improve outcomes in patients with heart failure and proteinuric kidney disease. In addition to other conservative measures, K+ binding drugs and sodium-glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors can assist in maintaining the use of these drugs.

An umbrella review and meta-analysis of renin-angiotensin system drugs use and COVID-19 outcomes.

BACKGROUND: Despite the availability of extensive literature on the effect of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs)/angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs) on COVID-19 outcomes, the evidence is still controversial. We aimed to provide a comprehensive assessment of the effect of ACEIs/ARBs on COVID-19-related outcomes by summarising the currently available evidence. METHODS: An umbrella review was conducted using Medline (OVID), Embase, Scopus, Cochrane library and medRxiv from inception to 1 February 2021. Systematic reviews with meta-analysis that evaluated the effect of ACEIs/ARBs on COVID-19-related clinical outcomes were eligible. Studies' quality was appraised using the AMSTAR 2 Critical Appraisal Tool. Data were analysed using the random-effects modelling including several subgroup analyses. Heterogenicity was assessed using I2 statistic. The study protocol was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021233398) and reported using PRISMA guidelines. RESULTS: Overall, 47 reviews were eligible for inclusion. Out of the nine COVID-19 outcomes evaluated, there was significant associations between ACEIs/ARBs use and each of death (OR = 0.80, 95%CI = 0.75-0.86; I2  = 51.9%), death/ICU admission as composite outcome (OR = 0.86, 95%CI = 0.80-0.92; I2  = 43.9%), severe COVID-19 (OR = 0.86, 95%CI = 0.78-0.95; I2  = 68%) and hospitalisation (OR = 1.23, 95%CI = 1.04-1.46; I2  = 76.4%). The significant reduction in death/ICU admission, however, was higher among studies which presented adjusted measure of effects (OR = 0.63, 95%CI = 0.47-0.84) and were of moderate quality (OR = 0.74, 95%CI = 0.63-0.85). CONCLUSIONS: Collective evidence from observational studies indicate a good quality evidence on the significant association between ACEIs/ARBs use and reduction in death and death/ICU admission, but poor-quality evidence on both reducing severe COVID-19 and increasing hospitalisation. Our findings further support the current recommendations of not discontinuing ACEIs/ARBs therapy in patients with COVID-19.

Analysis of the trend in community prescribing of RAAS inhibitors during the COVID-19 pandemic.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has sparked novel research and insights, but also concerns and anxiety regarding established practices. Early into the pandemic, public and scientific concern was raised regarding the role of renin-angiotensin- aldosterone system (RAAS) inhibitors on the susceptibility to COVID-19 given their effect on angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 (ACE-2), the host receptor for the virus. This gathered media attention globally, despite several health boards encouraging the ongoing use of these medications. We aimed to investigate whether, despite advice supporting continued use of these medications, there was a change in prescribing practices for RAAS inhibitors in general practice. Data were collated from the NHS digital platform, which provides monthly practice-level prescribing information for all primary care practices in England. We performed an interrupted time-series analysis on national-level prescribing data comparing time-series coefficients pre- and post-March 2020 with metformin used as a control. We find that from March to December 2020, prescribing rates of RAAS inhibitors were reduced relative to the previous time-series trend. This finding persisted after adjustment for rates of metformin prescription. This suggests that there was a change in prescribing behaviour during the COVID-19 pandemic, which may be linked to the public and scientific concerns during this time.