Skip to main content
Erschienen in: Critical Care 1/2020

Open Access 18.05.2020 | COVID-19 | Research Letter

Angiotensin II infusion in COVID-19-associated vasodilatory shock: a case series

verfasst von: Alberto Zangrillo, Giovanni Landoni, Luigi Beretta, Federica Morselli, Ary Serpa Neto, Rinaldo Bellomo, the COVID-BioB Study Group

Erschienen in: Critical Care | Ausgabe 1/2020

download
DOWNLOAD
print
DRUCKEN
insite
SUCHEN
Hinweise
A comment to this article is available online at https://​doi.​org/​10.​1186/​s13054-020-03144-6.
A comment to this article is available online at https://​doi.​org/​10.​1186/​s13054-020-03233-6.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Two thirds of ventilated COVID-19 patients require vasopressor support [1]. Recommended vasopressors include norepinephrine and vasopressin. Recently, based on a randomized trial [2], angiotensin II (ANGII) was FDA- and EMA-approved for catecholamine-resistant vasodilatory shock. ANGII use as primary vasopressor for vasodilatory shock has never been reported, let alone for COVID-19-associated vasodilatory shock. ANGII may be logical in this setting. It specifically assists patients recently exposed to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors [2, 3] and increases the internalization and downregulation of angiotensin-converting enzyme 2 [4], the receptor for COVID-19. Its use may also inform the debate about the risks and benefits of angiotensin receptor blockers in COVID-19-infected patients [5]. In this pilot compassionate-use case series, we used ANGII either as primary or rescue vasopressor in ventilated patients with COVID-19-associated vasodilatory shock and assessed the course of key physiological variables during the first 48 h of treatment.
We studied a cohort of consecutive ventilated patients in COVID-19-dedicated ICUs at San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy. Patients had vasodilatory shock and COVID-19-related infection (positive viral RNA biospecimen and typical clinical and radiological features). The Ethics Committee approved compassionate use of the drug.
All cases received commercial ANGII (Giapreza®, La Jolla San Diego, CA) as continuous infusion started at 20 ng/kg/min and titrated to a MAP target > 65 mmHg. We collected key data before and during 48 h of angiotensin II infusion.
Over 6 days (March 12 to March 18, 2020) we treated 16 patients, 10 with ANGII as first-line agent, five as second-line agent (Table 1), and one patient with unobtainable data. ANGII dose was relatively constant. MAP and urine output remained stable; lactate and creatinine increased and C-reactive protein decreased (Table 1). However, the SpO2/FiO2 ratio increased significantly with a decrease in FiO2 and PEEP (Fig. 1). At latest follow-up (1 week), 14 patients were alive.
Table 1
Baseline characteristics and physiological changes in treated patients
 
Baseline
(n = 15)
After 24 h
(n = 15)
After 48 h
(n = 15)
Age, years
64 (54–69)
Male gender
11 (73.3)
Angiotensin II as first-line agent
10 (66.7)
Angiotensin II dose, ng/kg/min
20.0 (5.0–20.0)
20.0 (8.4–20.8)
20.0 (8.1–20.8)
Support and drugs
 High dose catecholamine (> 0.25 μg/kg/min)
1 (6.7)
 Receiving catecholamine > 12 h
2 (13.3)
 Prone positioning
5 (41.7)
11 (78.6)
11 (78.6)
 Use of tocilizumab
5 (35.7)
 Norepinephrine dose, μg/kg/min
0.10 (0.10–0.20)
0.02 (0.00–0.09)
0.01 (0.00–0.14)
 Hours using before
8.5 (1.8–15.8)
Vital signs at start
 Systolic arterial pressure, mmHg
110 (95–115)
110 (105–129)
120 (115–120)
 Diastolic arterial pressure, mmHg
60 (52–64)
60 (56–64)
70 (59–70)
 Mean arterial pressure, mmHg
71 (65–79)
77 (76–80)
85 (80–87)
 Heart rate, bpm
82 (70–92)
72 (68–83)
71 (66–76)
 Atrial fibrillation
1 (7.1)
 Cumulative urine output, mL
237.5 (71.2–365.0)
620.0 (385.0–750.0)
727.0 (470.0–1050.0)
 Oliguria
3 (30.0)
Ventilatory support
 FiO2
0.70 (0.61–0.70)
0.50 (0.40–0.60)
0.40 (0.36–0.54)
 PEEP, cmH2O
14 (12–15)
12 (10–12)
11 (10–14)
 SpO2, %
97 (94–99)
98 (96–98)
97 (91–98)
 PaO2/FiO2
121.4 (98.1–218.1)
195.2 (148.3–245.0)
200.0 (168.0–248.5)
 SpO2/FiO2
140.7 (132.5–150.6)
191.5 (118.4–258.0)
193.8 (142.2–235.9)
Laboratory tests at start
 Lactate, mmol/L
1.49 (1.36–1.56)
1.72 (1.58–2.00)
1.83 (1.53–2.15)
 Creatinine, mg/dL
1.00 (0.85–1.68)
1.69 (1.16–2.38)
1.69 (1.06–2.43)
 C-reactive protein, mg/dL
232.3 (165.4–269.2)
202.0 (148.4–231.1)
115.0 (95.0–190.4)
 White blood cell count, × 1000 cells/mm3
11.9 (7.7–13.2)
10.1 (6.2–12.4)
9.2 (7.2–14.2)
 Lymphocyte count, × 1000 cells/mm3
5.30 (3.05–16.222)
7.90 (3.70–12.85)
8.30 (5.20–13.50)
Data are median (quartile 25% to quartile 75%) or N (%)
PEEP positive end-expiratory pressure
In ventilated patients with COVID-19-associated vasodilatory shock, we assessed the initial physiological changes associated with ANGII infusion as primary or rescue vasopressor. Overall, the administration of ANGII was associated with achievement and maintenance of target MAP, an increase on SpO2/FiO2 ratio, and a decrease in FiO2. These oxygenation improvements were significant.
This represents the first experience with ANGII in COVID-19-associated vasodilatory shock and with ANGII as primary vasopressor in humans. The findings are consistent with those of a previous trial and subsequent subgroup [2] and ANG I/II ratio-related analyses [3]. They suggest the absence of early physiologically harm and improved oxygenation with ANG II.
The key limitations of this study are obvious. It is single-center, small, observational in nature; lacks a control population; and is open-label. However, in this pandemic setting, the ethics of ensuring compassionate drug use to all patients were considered a priority. Moreover, before considering controlled trials, evidence of some physiological safety was considered important. Finally, under the extraordinary pressures of the most dramatic health disaster in Italy’s history in a century, this study was the best possible under the circumstances.
In conclusion, we provide the first observational cohort study of ANGII infusion in ventilated patients with COVID-19-associated vasodilatory shock. Our findings provide preliminary evidence to assist clinicians in their choice of vasopressors and justify and help design future controlled studies.

Acknowledgements

Collaborating author names from COVID-BioB Study Group:
Anna Mara Scandroglio MD1
Sergio Colombo, MD 1
Antonio Dell’Acqua, MD 1
Paolo Silvani, MD 1
Evgeny Fominskiy, MD 1
Giacomo Monti, MD 1
Maria Luisa Azzolini, MD 1
Antonio Bellantoni, MD 1
Cristina Barberio, MD 1
Gabriele Valsecchi, MD 1
Omar Saleh, MD 1
Gaetano Lombardi, MD 1
Moreno Tresoldi, MD 1
Paolo Scarpellini, MD 1
Lorenzo Dagna, MD 1
Fabio Ciceri, MD 1
Yanase Fumitaka, MD2
Affiliations
1 Department of Anesthesia and Intensive Care, IRCCS San Raffaele Scientific Institute, Milan, Italy
2 Department of Intensive Care, Austin Hospital, Melbourne, Australia
Ethical Committee approved the compassionate use of the study drug for this study (which is approved by European Medical Association [EMA], but not yet commercialized).
Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interest.
Open AccessThis article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://​creativecommons.​org/​licenses/​by/​4.​0/​. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://​creativecommons.​org/​publicdomain/​zero/​1.​0/​) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated in a credit line to the data.

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Literatur
2.
Zurück zum Zitat Khanna A, English SW, Wang XS, Ham K, Tumlin J, Szerlip H, et al. Angiotensin II for the treatment of vasodilatory shock. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(5):419–30.CrossRef Khanna A, English SW, Wang XS, Ham K, Tumlin J, Szerlip H, et al. Angiotensin II for the treatment of vasodilatory shock. N Engl J Med. 2017;377(5):419–30.CrossRef
3.
Zurück zum Zitat Bellomo R, Wunderink RG, Szerlip H, English SW, Busse LW, Deane AM, et al. Angiotensin I and angiotensin II concentrations and their ratio in catecholamine-resistant vasodilatory shock. Crit Care. 2020;24(1):43.CrossRef Bellomo R, Wunderink RG, Szerlip H, English SW, Busse LW, Deane AM, et al. Angiotensin I and angiotensin II concentrations and their ratio in catecholamine-resistant vasodilatory shock. Crit Care. 2020;24(1):43.CrossRef
4.
Zurück zum Zitat Busse LW, Chow JH, McCurdy MT, Khanna AK. COVID-19 and the RAAS - a potential role for angiotenin II? Crticial Cre. 2020;24:136–40. Busse LW, Chow JH, McCurdy MT, Khanna AK. COVID-19 and the RAAS - a potential role for angiotenin II? Crticial Cre. 2020;24:136–40.
Metadaten
Titel
Angiotensin II infusion in COVID-19-associated vasodilatory shock: a case series
verfasst von
Alberto Zangrillo
Giovanni Landoni
Luigi Beretta
Federica Morselli
Ary Serpa Neto
Rinaldo Bellomo
the COVID-BioB Study Group
Publikationsdatum
18.05.2020
Verlag
BioMed Central
Schlagwort
COVID-19
Erschienen in
Critical Care / Ausgabe 1/2020
Elektronische ISSN: 1364-8535
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-020-02928-0

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 1/2020

Critical Care 1/2020 Zur Ausgabe

Update AINS

Bestellen Sie unseren Fach-Newsletter und bleiben Sie gut informiert.