需要血液透析的患者开始服用司维拉姆与胃肠道出血住院治疗之间的关系。

IF 4.3 3区 医学 Q1 UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY
American Journal of Nephrology Pub Date : 2024-01-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-29 DOI:10.1159/000538253
Dustin Le, Deidra C Crews, Morgan E Grams, Josef Coresh, Jung-Im Shin
{"title":"需要血液透析的患者开始服用司维拉姆与胃肠道出血住院治疗之间的关系。","authors":"Dustin Le, Deidra C Crews, Morgan E Grams, Josef Coresh, Jung-Im Shin","doi":"10.1159/000538253","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Case reports have suggested a causative role between sevelamer use and subsequent gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB), but no large observational studies have evaluated this association.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using the United States Renal Data System database from 2015 to 2019, we examined the association between initiation of sevelamer (vs. non-sevelamer containing phosphate binders) and GIB hospitalization as well as all-cause mortality among individuals on hemodialysis. We emulated a target trial using Cox regression models and inverse probability of treatment weights to estimate the adjusted hazard ratios (HR) across outcomes and subgroups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 21,354 new users of phosphate binders (11,276 sevelamer and 10,078 non-sevelamer) with baseline lab data (calcium, phosphorus, hemoglobin, and albumin), there were 2,811 GIB hospitalizations and 5,920 deaths after a median follow-up of 1.3 years. Compared with the initiation of non-sevelamer binders, sevelamer was not associated with an increased risk of GIB hospitalization (89 vs. 90 events per 1,000 person-years; IPTW-HR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.91-1.06) or all-cause mortality (220 vs. 224 events per 1,000 person-years; IPTW-HR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.93-1.03). Subgroup analyses (such as diabetes and anti-coagulation use) were generally consistent, and there was no association between sevelamer dose and GIB hospitalization.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Among patients requiring hemodialysis, sevelamer (vs. non-sevelamer) containing phosphate binders was not associated with increased risk of GIB hospitalization.</p>","PeriodicalId":7570,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Nephrology","volume":" ","pages":"450-462"},"PeriodicalIF":4.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Association of Sevelamer Initiation with Gastrointestinal Bleeding Hospitalization in Individuals Requiring Hemodialysis.\",\"authors\":\"Dustin Le, Deidra C Crews, Morgan E Grams, Josef Coresh, Jung-Im Shin\",\"doi\":\"10.1159/000538253\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Case reports have suggested a causative role between sevelamer use and subsequent gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB), but no large observational studies have evaluated this association.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Using the United States Renal Data System database from 2015 to 2019, we examined the association between initiation of sevelamer (vs. non-sevelamer containing phosphate binders) and GIB hospitalization as well as all-cause mortality among individuals on hemodialysis. We emulated a target trial using Cox regression models and inverse probability of treatment weights to estimate the adjusted hazard ratios (HR) across outcomes and subgroups.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 21,354 new users of phosphate binders (11,276 sevelamer and 10,078 non-sevelamer) with baseline lab data (calcium, phosphorus, hemoglobin, and albumin), there were 2,811 GIB hospitalizations and 5,920 deaths after a median follow-up of 1.3 years. Compared with the initiation of non-sevelamer binders, sevelamer was not associated with an increased risk of GIB hospitalization (89 vs. 90 events per 1,000 person-years; IPTW-HR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.91-1.06) or all-cause mortality (220 vs. 224 events per 1,000 person-years; IPTW-HR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.93-1.03). Subgroup analyses (such as diabetes and anti-coagulation use) were generally consistent, and there was no association between sevelamer dose and GIB hospitalization.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Among patients requiring hemodialysis, sevelamer (vs. non-sevelamer) containing phosphate binders was not associated with increased risk of GIB hospitalization.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":7570,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"American Journal of Nephrology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"450-462\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"American Journal of Nephrology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1159/000538253\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/3/29 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Nephrology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1159/000538253","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"UROLOGY & NEPHROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

导言:病例报告表明,使用司维拉姆与随后的胃肠道出血(GIB)之间存在因果关系,但没有大型观察性研究对这种关联进行评估。方法 我们利用美国肾脏数据系统 2015 年至 2019 年的数据库,研究了血液透析患者开始使用司维拉姆(与不含司维拉姆的磷酸盐结合剂相比)与 GIB 住院治疗以及全因死亡率之间的关系。我们模仿目标试验,使用 Cox 回归模型和反向治疗概率权重来估算不同结果和亚组的调整后危险比 (HR)。结果 在 21,354 名新使用磷酸盐结合剂(11,276 名使用sevelamer,10,078 名使用非sevelamer)并提供基线实验室数据(钙、磷、血红蛋白和白蛋白)的患者中,在中位随访 1.3 年后,有 2,811 人因 GIB 住院,5,920 人死亡。与开始使用非塞韦拉铵粘合剂相比,塞韦拉铵与 GIB 住院风险增加(每 1000 人年 89 例与 90 例;IPTW-HR 0.98,95% CI 0.91 - 1.06)或全因死亡率增加(每 1000 人年 220 例与 224 例;IPTW-HR 0.98 95% CI 0.93 - 1.03)无关。亚组分析(如糖尿病和抗凝药物的使用)结果基本一致,且西维拉姆剂量与 GIB 住院治疗之间没有关联。结论 在需要进行血液透析的患者中,含有磷酸盐结合剂的司维拉姆(与非司维拉姆)与 GIB 住院风险的增加无关。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Association of Sevelamer Initiation with Gastrointestinal Bleeding Hospitalization in Individuals Requiring Hemodialysis.

Introduction: Case reports have suggested a causative role between sevelamer use and subsequent gastrointestinal bleeding (GIB), but no large observational studies have evaluated this association.

Methods: Using the United States Renal Data System database from 2015 to 2019, we examined the association between initiation of sevelamer (vs. non-sevelamer containing phosphate binders) and GIB hospitalization as well as all-cause mortality among individuals on hemodialysis. We emulated a target trial using Cox regression models and inverse probability of treatment weights to estimate the adjusted hazard ratios (HR) across outcomes and subgroups.

Results: Among 21,354 new users of phosphate binders (11,276 sevelamer and 10,078 non-sevelamer) with baseline lab data (calcium, phosphorus, hemoglobin, and albumin), there were 2,811 GIB hospitalizations and 5,920 deaths after a median follow-up of 1.3 years. Compared with the initiation of non-sevelamer binders, sevelamer was not associated with an increased risk of GIB hospitalization (89 vs. 90 events per 1,000 person-years; IPTW-HR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.91-1.06) or all-cause mortality (220 vs. 224 events per 1,000 person-years; IPTW-HR: 0.98, 95% CI: 0.93-1.03). Subgroup analyses (such as diabetes and anti-coagulation use) were generally consistent, and there was no association between sevelamer dose and GIB hospitalization.

Conclusion: Among patients requiring hemodialysis, sevelamer (vs. non-sevelamer) containing phosphate binders was not associated with increased risk of GIB hospitalization.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
American Journal of Nephrology
American Journal of Nephrology 医学-泌尿学与肾脏学
CiteScore
7.50
自引率
2.40%
发文量
74
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: The ''American Journal of Nephrology'' is a peer-reviewed journal that focuses on timely topics in both basic science and clinical research. Papers are divided into several sections, including:
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信