Hyperkalaemia in the emergency department: Epidemiology, management and monitoring of treatment outcomes

Acute Hyperkalemia Management in the Emergency Department

Acute hyperkalemia is characterized by high concentrations of potassium in the blood that can potentially lead to life-threatening arrhythmias that require emergent treatment. Therapy involves the utilization of a constellation of different agents, all targeting different goals of care. The first, and most important step in the treatment of severe hyperkalemia with electrocardiographic (ECG) changes, is to stabilize the myocardium with calcium in order to resolve or mitigate the development of arrythmias. Next, it is vital to target the underlying etiology of any ECG changes by redistributing potassium from the extracellular space with the use of intravenous regular insulin and inhaled beta-2 agonists. Finally, the focus should shift to the elimination of excess potassium from the body through the use of intravenous furosemide, oral potassium-binding agents, or renal replacement therapy. Multiple nuances and controversies exist with these therapies, and it is important to have a robust understanding of the underlying support and recommendations for each of these agents to ensure optimal efficacy and minimize the potential for adverse effects and medication errors.

Implications of differences between point-of-care blood gas analyser and laboratory analyser potassium results on hyperkalaemia diagnosis & treatment

BACKGROUND

Hyperkalaemia is managed in the emergency department (ED) following measurement of potassium results by blood gas analysers (BGA) or laboratory analysers (LAB).

AIMS

To determine the prevalence of clinically significant differences between BGA and LAB potassium results and the impact on ED hyperkalaemia management.

METHODS

Retrospective analysis of time-matched ED BGA and LAB potassium samples from 2019 to 2020 (taken within 15 min, one or both results ≥6.0 mmol/L). Mean differences and 95% limits of agreement (LoA) were determined for pairs with one or both results ≥6.0 mmol/L and a separate 500 consecutive sample pairs.

RESULTS

Four hundred eighty-eight matched BGA and LAB samples met the inclusion criteria. Of these, 201 (41.2%) differed by ≤0.5 mmol/L, 169 (34.6%) included a haemolysed LAB sample, and 12 (2.5%) had an unreportable BGA sample. One hundred six (21.7%) pairs differed by >0.5 mmol/L, and 60/106 (57%) had normal LAB potassium results, but BGA indicated moderate/severe hyperkalaemia (two of these pairs received hyperkalaemia treatment). Of patients with a haemolysed LAB sample, or where pairs differed by >0.5 mmol, 48 were treated with insulin and five (10.4%) experienced hypoglycaemia. Mean differences and LoA for pairs with LAB results <6.0 mmol/L but BGA ≥6.0 mmol/L demonstrated unacceptable agreement, with 18 (25.7%) BGA results exceeding 8.0 mmol/L.

CONCLUSIONS

Potentially significant discordance may occur between BGA and LAB potassium results. Clinicians need to be aware of factors impacting both analytical methods' accuracy (such as poor venepuncture or sample handling, (K) EDTA interference) and undetectable haemolysis with BGA measurements. We recommend BGA hyperkalaemia be confirmed with LAB results using a non-haemolysed sample where time permits.