Angiotensin II for the Treatment of Vasodilatory Shock

BACKGROUND Vasodilatory shock that does not respond to high-dose vasopressors is associated with high mortality. We investigated the effectiveness of angiotensin II for the treatment of patients with this condition. METHODS We randomly assigned patients with vasodilatory shock who were receiving more than 0.2 mu g of norepinephrine per kilogram of body weight per minute or the equivalent dose of another vasopressor to receive infusions of either angiotensin II or placebo. The primary end point was a response with respect to mean arterial pressure at hour 3 after the start of infusion, with response defined as an increase from baseline of at least 10 mm Hg or an increase to at least 75 mm Hg, without an increase in the dose of background vasopressors. RESULTS A total of 344 patients were assigned to one of the two regimens; 321 received a study intervention (163 received angiotensin II, and 158 received placebo) and were included in the analysis. The primary end point was reached by more patients in the angiotensin II group (114 of 163 patients, 69.9%) than in the placebo group (37 of 158 patients, 23.4%) (odds ratio, 7.95; 95% confidence interval [CI], 4.76 to 13.3; P<0.001). At 48 hours, the mean improvement in the cardiovascular Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score (scores range from 0 to 4, with higher scores indicating more severe dysfunction) was greater in the angiotensin II group than in the placebo group (-1.75 vs. -1.28, P = 0.01). Serious adverse events were reported in 60.7% of the patients in the angiotensin II group and in 67.1% in the placebo group. Death by day 28 occurred in 75 of 163 patients (46%) in the angiotensin II group and in 85 of 158 patients (54%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio, 0.78; 95% CI, 0.57 to 1.07; P = 0.12). CONCLUSIONS Angiotensin II effectively increased blood pressure in patients with vasodilatory shock that did not respond to high doses of conventional vasopressors. (Funded by La Jolla Pharmaceutical Company; ATHOS-3 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02338843.)Peer reviewe

Coin perception studies and the concept of schemata

The proposition that perception is in- fluenced by object value and perceiver need has enjoyed an exciting career since it was given prominence by Bruner and Goodman in an oral and, later, a printed report (3) of dramatic differ- ences between rich and poor children in their judgments of coin sizes. Whether that study or subsequent ones can be said to have upheld the proposition may be questionable; but the effect on psy- chologists is beyond doubt. They were refreshed and stimulated. The ideas, the experimental approach, and the re- sults were new, and quite obviously ap- pealed to current needs

Angiotensin I and angiotensin II concentrations and their ratio in catecholamine-resistant vasodilatory shock.

BackgroundIn patients with vasodilatory shock, plasma concentrations of angiotensin I (ANG I) and II (ANG II) and their ratio may reflect differences in the response to severe vasodilation, provide novel insights into its biology, and predict clinical outcomes. The objective of these protocol prespecified and subsequent post hoc analyses was to assess the epidemiology and outcome associations of plasma ANG I and ANG II levels and their ratio in patients with catecholamine-resistant vasodilatory shock (CRVS) enrolled in the Angiotensin II for the Treatment of High-Output Shock (ATHOS-3) study.MethodsWe measured ANG I and ANG II levels at baseline, calculated their ratio, and compared these results to values from healthy volunteers (controls). We dichotomized patients according to the median ANG I/II ratio (1.63) and compared demographics, clinical characteristics, and clinical outcomes. We constructed a Cox proportional hazards model to test the independent association of ANG I, ANG II, and their ratio with clinical outcomes.ResultsMedian baseline ANG I level (253 pg/mL [interquartile range (IQR) 72.30-676.00 pg/mL] vs 42 pg/mL [IQR 30.46-87.34 pg/mL] in controls; P&nbsp;&lt; &nbsp;0.0001) and median ANG I/II ratio (1.63 [IQR 0.98-5.25] vs 0.4 [IQR 0.28-0.64] in controls; P&nbsp;&lt; &nbsp;0.0001) were elevated, whereas median ANG II levels were similar (84 pg/mL [IQR 23.85-299.50 pg/mL] vs 97 pg/mL [IQR 35.27-181.01 pg/mL] in controls; P&nbsp;= 0.9895). At baseline, patients with a ratio above the median (≥1.63) had higher ANG I levels (P&nbsp;&lt; &nbsp;0.0001), lower ANG II levels (P&nbsp;&lt; &nbsp;0.0001), higher albumin concentrations (P&nbsp;= 0.007), and greater incidence of recent (within 1 week) exposure to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (P&nbsp;&lt; &nbsp;0.00001), and they received a higher norepinephrine-equivalent dose (P&nbsp;= 0.003). In the placebo group, a baseline ANG I/II ratio &lt;1.63 was associated with improved survival (hazard ratio 0.56; 95% confidence interval 0.36-0.88; P&nbsp;= 0.01) on unadjusted analyses.ConclusionsPatients with CRVS have elevated ANG I levels and ANG I/II ratios compared with healthy controls. In such patients, a high ANG I/II ratio is associated with greater norepinephrine requirements and is an independent predictor of mortality, thus providing a biological rationale for interventions aimed at its correction.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02338843. Registered 14 January 2015

Angiotensin i and angiotensin II concentrations and their ratio in catecholamine-resistant vasodilatory shock

BACKGROUND:In patients with vasodilatory shock, plasma concentrations of angiotensin I (ANG I) and II (ANG II) and their ratio may reflect differences in the response to severe vasodilation, provide novel insights into its biology, and predict clinical outcomes. The objective of these protocol prespecified and subsequent post hoc analyses was to assess the epidemiology and outcome associations of plasma ANG I and ANG II levels and their ratio in patients with catecholamine-resistant vasodilatory shock (CRVS) enrolled in the Angiotensin II for the Treatment of High-Output Shock (ATHOS-3) study. METHODS:We measured ANG I and ANG II levels at baseline, calculated their ratio, and compared these results to values from healthy volunteers (controls). We dichotomized patients according to the median ANG I/II ratio (1.63) and compared demographics, clinical characteristics, and clinical outcomes. We constructed a Cox proportional hazards model to test the independent association of ANG I, ANG II, and their ratio with clinical outcomes. RESULTS:Median baseline ANG I level (253 pg/mL [interquartile range (IQR) 72.30-676.00 pg/mL] vs 42 pg/mL [IQR 30.46-87.34 pg/mL] in controls; P &lt;  0.0001) and median ANG I/II ratio (1.63 [IQR 0.98-5.25] vs 0.4 [IQR 0.28-0.64] in controls; P &lt;  0.0001) were elevated, whereas median ANG II levels were similar (84 pg/mL [IQR 23.85-299.50 pg/mL] vs 97 pg/mL [IQR 35.27-181.01 pg/mL] in controls; P = 0.9895). At baseline, patients with a ratio above the median (≥1.63) had higher ANG I levels (P &lt;  0.0001), lower ANG II levels (P &lt;  0.0001), higher albumin concentrations (P = 0.007), and greater incidence of recent (within 1 week) exposure to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (P &lt;  0.00001), and they received a higher norepinephrine-equivalent dose (P = 0.003). In the placebo group, a baseline ANG I/II ratio &lt;1.63 was associated with improved survival (hazard ratio 0.56; 95% confidence interval 0.36-0.88; P = 0.01) on unadjusted analyses. CONCLUSIONS:Patients with CRVS have elevated ANG I levels and ANG I/II ratios compared with healthy controls. In such patients, a high ANG I/II ratio is associated with greater norepinephrine requirements and is an independent predictor of mortality, thus providing a biological rationale for interventions aimed at its correction. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT02338843. Registered 14 January 2015