The use of angiotensin II to treat profound hypotension in a patient taking amiodarone

Angiotensin-II for vasoplegia following cardiac surgery

INTRODUCTION

The objective of this study was to describe the implementation and outcomes of a protocol outlining angiotensin-II utilization for vasoplegia following cardiac surgery.

METHODS

This was a retrospective chart review at a single-center university hospital. Included patients received angiotensin-II for vasoplegia refractory to standard interventions, including norepinephrine 20 mcg/min and vasopressin 0.04 units/min, following cardiac surgery between April 2021 and April 2022.

RESULTS

30 patients received angiotensin-II for refractory vasoplegia. Adjunctive agents at angiotensin-II initiation included corticosteroids (26 patients; 87%), epinephrine (26 patients; 87%), dobutamine (17 patients; 57%), dopamine (9 patients; 30%), milrinone (2 patients; 7%), and hydroxocobalamin (4 patients; 13%). At 3 hours, the median mean arterial pressure increased from baseline (70 vs 61.5 mmHg, p = .0006). Median norepinephrine doses at angiotensin-II initiation, 1 hour, 3 hours, and angiotensin-II discontinuation were 0.22, 0.16 (p = .0023), 0.10 (p < .0001), and 0.07 (p < .0001) mcg/kg/min. Median dobutamine doses decreased throughout angiotensin-II infusion from eight to six mcg/kg/min (p = .0313). Other vasoactive medication doses were unchanged. Three patients (10%) subsequently received hydroxocobalamin. Thirteen (43.3%) and five (16.7%) patients experienced mortality by day 28 and venous or arterial thrombosis events, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

The administration of angiotensin-II to vasoplegic patients following cardiac surgery was associated with increased mean arterial pressure, reduced norepinephrine dosages, and reduced dobutamine dosages.

The Use of Angiotensin II for the Treatment of Post-cardiopulmonary Bypass Vasoplegia

Purpose

Vasoplegia is a common complication after cardiac surgery and is related to the use of cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). Despite its association with increased morbidity and mortality, no consensus exists in terms of its treatment. In December 2017, angiotensin II (AII) was approved by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) for use in vasodilatory shock; however, except for the ATHOS-3 trial, its use in vasoplegic patients that underwent cardiac surgery on CPB has mainly been reported in case reports. Thus, the aim of this review is to collect all the clinically relevant data and describe the pharmacologic mechanism, efficacy, and safety of this novel pharmacologic agent for the treatment of refractory vasoplegia in this population.

Methods

Two independent reviewers performed a systematic search in PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library using relevant MeSH terms (Angiotensin II, Vasoplegia, Cardiopulmonary Bypass, Cardiac Surgical Procedures).

Results

The literature search yielded 820 unique articles. In total, 9 studies were included. Of those, 2 were randomized clinical trials (RCTs) and 6 were case reports and 1 was a retrospective cohort study.

Conclusions

AII appears to be a promising means of treatment for patients with post-operative vasoplegia. It is demonstrated to be effective in raising blood pressure, while no major adverse events have been reported. It remains uncertain whether this agent will be broadly available and whether it will be more advantageous in the clinical management of vasoplegia compared to other available vasopressors. For that reason, we should contain our eagerness and enthusiasm regarding its use until supplementary knowledge becomes available.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1007/s10557-020-07098-3) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Role of angiotensin II in treatment of refractory distributive shock

OBJECTIVE

Clinical data and gaps in knowledge regarding angiotensin II (AT2), which was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in December 2017 via priority review for treatment of septic and other vasodilatory shock, is discussed.

SUMMARY

AT2 is an endogenous peptide that raises blood pressure via vasoconstriction and increased aldosterone release. It was previously available but withdrawn from the US market; previous low-quality research describes increases in mean arterial pressure (MAP). The recent approval of AT2 was based on data from a Phase III randomized trial comparing i.v. AT2 (n = 163) with placebo use (n = 158) in patients with vasodilatory shock receiving high doses of other vasopressors. AT2 significantly increased achievement of the primary endpoint, MAP response at 3 hours after the start of infusion, relative to placebo use (69.9% [n = 114] versus 23.4% [n = 37], p < 0.0001). Serious adverse events occurred in 60.7% (n = 99) and 67.1% (n = 106) of patients treated with AT2 and placebo recipients, respectively, including venous and arterial thromboembolic events (12.9% [n = 21] and 5.1% [n = 8], respectively). No significant effects of AT2 on 7- or 28-day mortality were seen among all patients in the ATHOS-3 trial. However, post hoc analyses suggested that AT2 may reduce mortality in patients with low baseline AT2 levels, exaggerated response to AT2, and acute kidney injury receiving concomitant renal replacement therapy. Overall, due to shortcomings of the ATHOS-3 trial data and the absence of confirmatory studies, the optimal place in therapy of AT2 for vasodilatory shock cannot be determined with confidence.

CONCLUSION

Intravenous AT2 represents a novel treatment strategy for refractory septic or other vasodilatory shock, although findings of safety and efficacy have not been replicated and the drug's optimal place in therapy is uncertain.

The effect of angiotensin II on blood pressure in patients with circulatory shock: a structured review of the literature

BACKGROUND

Circulatory shock is a common syndrome with a high mortality and limited therapeutic options. Despite its discovery and use in clinical and experimental settings more than a half-century ago, angiotensin II (Ang II) has only been recently evaluated as a vasopressor in distributive shock. We examined existing literature for associations between Ang II and the resolution of circulatory shock.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Ovid, and Embase to identify all English literature accounts of intravenous Ang II in humans for the treatment of shock (systolic blood pressure [SBP] ≤ 90 mmHg or a mean arterial pressure [MAP] ≤ 65 mmHg), and hand-searched the references of extracted papers for further studies meeting inclusion criteria. Of 3743 articles identified, 24 studies including 353 patients met inclusion criteria. Complete data existed for 276 patients. Extracted data included study type, publication year, demographics, type of shock, dosing of Ang II or other vasoactive medications, and changes in BP, lactate, and urine output. BP effects were grouped according to type of shock, with additional analyses completed for patients with absent blood pressure. Shock was distributive (n = 225), cardiogenic (n = 38), or from other causes (n = 90). Blood pressure as absent in 18 patients.

RESULTS

For the 276 patients with complete data, MAP rose by 23.4% from 63.3 mmHg to 78.1 mmHg in response to Ang II (dose range: 15 ng/kg/min to 60 mcg/min). SBP rose by 125.2% from 56.9 mmHg to 128.2 mmHg (dose range: 0.2 mcg/min to a 1500 mcg bolus). A total of 271 patients with complete data were determined to exhibit a BP effect which was directly associated with Ang II. Subgroups (patients with cardiogenic, septic, and other types of shock) exhibited similar increases in BP. In patients with absent BP, deemed to be cardiac arrest, return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) was achieved, and BP increased by an average of 107.3 mmHg in 11 of 18 patients. The remaining seven patients with cardiac arrest did not respond.

CONCLUSIONS

Intravenous Ang II is associated with increased BP in patients with cardiogenic, distributive, and unclassified shock. A role may exist for Ang II in restoring circulation in cardiac arrest.

Selecting a Vasopressor Drug for Vasoplegic Shock After Adult Cardiac Surgery: A Systematic Literature Review

The choice of vasopressors to treat vasodilatory shock after cardiac surgery is a matter of controversy. We have systematically reviewed the literature and found that the data are insufficient to guide choice of agent. However, we found sufficient evidence that when a target blood pressure can not be achieved with a single agent, addition of another is more likely to help achieve the blood pressure target. We also found that there is no evidence that vasopressors induce organ ischemia. Finally, the lack of high quality data indicate that large multicenter trials are needed in this field.

Vasopressin therapy for vasoplegic syndrome following cardiopulmonary bypass

BACKGROUND

Hypotension refractory to maximal doses of alpha-adrenergic drugs after cardiac operations employing cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) has been referred as "vasoplegic syndrome." Vasopressin has been used for its therapy with encouraging results.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

16 patients (mean age 71, range 47 to 84 years) were treated with intravenous vasopressin (0.1-1 IU/min) for hypotension refractory to maximal doses (>30 microg/kg/min) of norepinephrine after undergoing complex cardiac operations employing CPB. Preoperative ejection fraction was 40.5% (mean, range 20% to 60%), preoperative NYHA class was 3.5 (mean). Hemodynamic measurements were obtained one hour before and one hour after beginning vasopressin infusion; urine output was measured for the 4 hours before and the 4 hours after beginning the infusion. Duration of vasopressin treatment was 58.8 +/- 37.3 hours (mean +/- SD).

RESULTS

Systolic blood pressure increased from 89.6 +/- 7.9 to 119.6 +/- 10.5 mmHg (mean +/- SD) (p < 0.001); systemic vascular resistance increased from 688.0 +/- 261.7 to 1043.3 +/- 337.1 dyne/s/cm2 (mean +/- SD) (p < 0.001); cardiac index decreased from 2.69 +/- 0.8 to 2.2 +/- 0.5 L/min/m2 (mean +/- SD) (p < 0.008); urine output increased from 36.8 +/- 30.4 to 72.8 +/- 38.2 mL/h (mean +/- SD) (p < 0.001). Seven patients (44%) survived the hospital stay.

CONCLUSIONS

High-dose vasopressin is effective in the treatment of the vasoplegic syndrome after cardiac operations employing cardiopulmonary bypass.

Should the angiotensin II antagonists be discontinued before surgery?

Angiotensin II antagonists (AIIA) are part of a new rational treatment of hypertension. Because adverse circulatory effects during anesthesia can occur in patients chronically treated with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, some clinicians discontinue them at least 24 h before operation. No data are available concerning AIIA administration in patients scheduled for vascular surgery performed under general anesthesia. The aim of this prospective randomized study was to compare hemodynamics during induction of anesthesia in patients chronically treated with AIIA and those of patients not receiving this drug on the morning before operation. Thirty-seven patients chronically treated with AIIA for hypertension were randomly assigned to two groups: Group I: AIIA discontinued on the day before surgery (n = 18); Group II: AIIA given 1 h before anesthesia (n = 19). Patients received sufentanil 0.4 microg/kg, propofol 1.5 mg/kg, and atracurium 0.5 mg/kg. During the procedure, the anesthesiologist was required to maintain systolic blood pressure and heart rate within 30% of baseline values using intravascular fluid administration and vasoconstric- tors (e.g. , ephedrine, phenylephrine, or terlipressin). Hemodynamic variables were recorded each 1 min. Hemodynamic study ended at incision. The number and duration of hemodynamic events were collected, and total doses of vasoactive drugs were noted in each group. Systolic arterial pressure was significantly decreased in Group II at 5, 15 and 23 min after induction of anesthesia (*P < 0.05). In this group, the decrease in systolic arterial pressure was associated with more frequent episodes of hypotension (AIIA withdrawn: 1 +/- 1; AIIA given: 2 +/- 1; P < 0.01), with a larger number of patients developing at least 1 episode of hypotension (AIIA withdrawn: 12; AIIA given: 19; P < 0.01), and a longer duration of an episode of hypotension (AIIA withdrawn: 3 +/- 4 min; AIIA given: 8 +/- 7 min; P < 0.01), and an increased need for vasoactive drugs. In conclusion, blockade of the renin-angiotensin system increases the potential hypotensive effect of anesthetic induction. A severe hypotensive episode, requiring vasoconstrictor treatment, occurs after induction of general anesthesia in patients chronically treated with AIIA. Recommendations to discontinue AIIA drugs on the day before the surgery may be justified.

IMPLICATIONS

This prospective randomized study demonstrated that more severe hypotensive episodes, requiring vasoconstrictor treatment, occur after induction of general anesthesia in patients chronically treated with AIIA and receiving this drug on the morning before operation, in comparison with those in whom AIIA were discontinued on the day before operation. Recommendations to discontinue these drugs on the day before the surgery may be justified.

Treating anesthesia-induced hypotension by angiotensin II in patients chronically treated with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors

Although angiotensin II bolus administration may be used to increase blood pressure in patients chronically treated with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) who have severe hypotension on anesthetic induction, no data are available describing its time course and its effects on the left ventricular function. Fourteen patients chronically treated with ACEI for hypertension and scheduled for vascular surgery were prospectively studied. Patients with cardiac insufficiency were excluded. A transesophageal echocardiography probe was inserted to assess systolic left ventricular function. When hypotension was observed (systolic arterial pressure [SAP] <85 mm Hg), an I.V. bolus of 2.5 microg of angiotensin II (AII) was given, and hemodynamic variables were recorded each 30 s over 5.5 min. Results are expressed as mean +/- SEM. Sixty seconds after the AII bolus injection, the SAP increased from 78 +/- 3 to 152 +/- 6 mm Hg. SAP remained higher than control until the 5th min. This was associated with significant increases in end-diastolic area (from 15.1 +/- 0.6 to 19.3 +/- 1.0 cm2, P < or = 0.001), end-systolic area (from 6.6 +/- 0.4 to 10.7 +/- 0.7 cm2, P < or = 0.001), end-systolic wall stress (from 32 +/- 0.05 to 82 +/- 7 kdynes/cm2, P < or = 0.001). In addition, a decrease in fiber-shortening velocity (from 1.1 +/- 0.05 to 0.76 +/- 0.04 circ/s, P < or = 0.05) and in fractional area change (from 0.57 +/- 0.02 to 0.44 +/- 0.02, P < or = 0.05) was observed. Heart rate did not significantly change during the study. Increases in preload and afterload were observed. However, the administration of AII causes a transient impairment in left ventricular function. We conclude that AII, given as an I.V. bolus of 2.5 microg, is effective in restoring arterial blood pressure within 60 s in patients chronically treated with ACEI.

IMPLICATIONS

Severe hypotension on anesthetic induction in patients chronically treated with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors for hypertension could be treated with an I.V. bolus of 2.5 microg of angiotensin II.

Lisinopril overdose and management with intravenous angiotensin II

OBJECTIVE

This report describes a case of lisinopril overdose managed in part with an infusion of angiotensin II in a patient with dilated cardiomyopathy and reviews other literature reporting angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitor overdose.

DATA SOURCES

Information concerning this patient was obtained through review of the medical chart, conversation with the attending physician, and personal involvement late in the course of the patient's therapy. We conducted MEDLINE and PAPERCHASE searches of the English language literature (restricted to human studies) from 1976 to the present, manually searched Current Contents and references from each publication reviewed, and contacted the manufacturer of lisinopril for any further references they could provide.

STUDY SELECTION

All case reports that described an ACE inhibitor overdose.

DATA EXTRACTION

Case reports were evaluated for the ACE inhibitor involved, amount ingested, and therapeutic management.

DATA SYNTHESIS

Ten patients with ACE inhibitor overdose have been reported, most of whom required only intravenous fluids for blood pressure support. The case presented here is the second report in which the patient's blood pressure was not adequately controlled with fluid and traditional vasopressors and required an infusion of angiotensin II.

CONCLUSIONS

Although only a few cases of ACE inhibitor overdose have been reported, it is possible that with widespread use of these agents, overdose may become a more common problem. Management of ACE inhibitor overdose should include general supportive care, gut decontamination when possible, intravenous fluids, and vasopressors if necessary. Intravenous angiotensin II may be effective in situations in which traditional vasopressors fail, and is a physiologically rational treatment.