DOI 10.1053/j.jvca.2022.01.002
Angiotensin II in Patients With Shock on Mechanical Circulatory Support: A Single-Center Retrospective Case Series.
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES
To describe angiotensin II (ANGII) use in patients on mechanical circulatory support (MCS). To evaluate the efficacy and safety of ANGII in patients with shock on MCS.
DESIGN
Retrospective cohort study.
SETTING
A single-center, quaternary care academic medical center.
PARTICIPANTS
The study comprised critically ill patients on MCS.
INTERVENTIONS: None.
MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN
RESULTS
Fourteen patients were included in this retrospective analysis. The median age was 54 years (44.8, 68.3) and 78.6% were men. Six patients were receiving venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support, 4 patients were receiving venovenous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation support, and 4 patients were on left ventricular assist devices. Five patients (36%) achieved hemodynamic response to ANGII at 3 hours, defined as a mean arterial pressure (MAP) of ≥65 mmHg or a 10-mmHg increase in MAP with a decrease or no change in total vasopressor dose. Overall, the median MAP increased from 61 mmHg (51, 73) at baseline to 66 mmHg (58, 71) at 3 hours, and the median norepinephrine dose decreased from 0.45 µg/kg/min (0.28, 0.6) at baseline to 0.2 µg/kg/min (0.18, 0.32) at 3 hours. The in-hospital mortality rate was 78.6%. Two patients experienced severe adverse drug events and 1 patient had a sentinel thrombotic event.
CONCLUSIONS
This study suggested that ANGII may provide a salvage treatment option in patients on MCS with refractory vasodilatory shock. There are several safety considerations with the use of ANGII in these patients. Prospective randomized controlled trials are needed to evaluate the safety and efficacy of ANGII in patients on MCS.
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.