Evidence Hub

Renal Outcomes With Potassium-Competitive Acid Blockers Versus Proton Pump Inhibitors in CKD

Kim SY, Lee H, Kim JS, Kim JH, Jeon HL

Kidney international reports, 2026

34,077 participants · 1 citation

Abstract

Introduction: Potassium-competitive acid blockers (P-CABs) have emerged as a promising alternative to proton pump inhibitors (PPIs) because of their rapid and sustained acid suppression. However, their renal safety in patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) has not been thoroughly evaluated. Given concerns about PPI-associated renal risks, we conducted a target trial-emulated cohort study to compare renal safety of P-CABs versus PPIs.

Methods: Using Korean National Health Insurance data, we identified patients with CKD newly initiating P-CABs or PPIs for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) between 2019 and 2022. Patients with previous renal replacement therapy (RRT) were excluded. The primary outcome was the first initiation of RRT. Propensity score (PS) matching (1:4) was applied, and hazard ratios (HRs) were estimated using Cox proportional hazards models. An intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis was also performed.

Results: A total of 34,077 patients were included, and 4107 P-CAB and 16,428 PPI users remained after matching. Over 60% in both groups were aged ≥ 65 years, and males were slightly more prevalent. P-CAB use was significantly associated with a lower risk of composite RRT initiation than PPI use (HR: 0.63, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.45-0.88). Although HRs for individual RRT events favored P-CABs, statistical significance was not reached. The ITT analysis showed consistent results (HR: 0.90, 95% CI: 0.82-0.99).

Conclusion: In this study, P-CABs were…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a cohort study, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 34,077 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free