Cited by 197Hemodynamic Monitoring and TherapyTrauma, Hemostasis, Coagulopathy, ResuscitationSepsis Diagnosis and Treatment

Intravenous angiotensin II for the treatment of high-output shock (ATHOS trial): a pilot study

Open access
Chawla, Lakhmir S, Busse, Laurence, Brasha-Mitchell, Ermira, Davison, Danielle, Honiq, Jacqueline, Alotaibi, Ziyad, Seneff, Michael G·2014·Critical Care

Abstract

Introduction: Patients with distributive shock who require high dose vasopressors have a high mortality. Angiotensin II (ATII) may prove useful in patients who remain hypotensive despite catecholamine and vasopressin therapy. The appropriate dose of parenteral angiotensin II for shock is unknown. Methods: In total, 20 patients with distributive shock and a cardiovascular Sequential Organ Failure Assessment score of 4 were randomized to either ATII infusion (N =10) or placebo (N =10) plus standard of care. ATII was started at a dose of 20 ng/kg/min, and titrated for a goal of maintaining a mean arterial pressure (MAP) of 65 mmHg. The infusion (either ATII or placebo) was continued for 6 hours then titrated off. The primary endpoint was the effect of ATII on the standing dose of norepinephrine required to maintain a MAP of 65 mmHg. Results: ATII resulted in marked reduction in norepinephrine dosing in all patients. The mean hour 1 norepinephrine dose for the placebo cohort was 27.6 ± 29.3 mcg/min versus 7.4 ± 12.4 mcg/min for the ATII cohort ( P =0.06). The most common adverse event attributable to ATII was hypertension, which occurred in 20% of patients receiving ATII. 30-day mortality for the ATII cohort and the placebo cohort was similar (50% versus 60%, P =1.00). Conclusion: Angiotensin II is an effective rescue vasopressor agent in patients with distributive shock requiring multiple vasopressors. The initial dose range of ATII that appears to be appropriate for patients with distributive shock is 2 to 10 ng/kg/min. Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01393782 . Registered 12 July 2011.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s13054-014-0534-9

Cites

19 of 19 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • There are data from RCTs on short versus long courses in specific conditions such as pneumonia, urinary tract infections, bacteremia, and intraabdominal infections.

    “There are data from RCTs in specific conditions such as pneumonia (286-289), urinary tract infections (290), bacteremia (291, 292), and intraabdominal infections (293).”

    From Surviving Sepsis Campaign: International Guidelines for Management of Sepsis and Septic Shock 2021. (2021) · cites this paper as [290]

    The Methods (Treatment assignments; page unavailable) describe randomization to angiotensin II or placebo for high-output shock. Our copy does not address RCTs comparing short and long treatment courses for pneumonia, urinary tract infection, bacteremia, or intraabdominal infection; searches for those conditions and antibiotic treatment duration found no relevant passage. (LLM, conf=0.77)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • A small pilot in 20 patients with vasodilatory septic shock showed physiological efficacy without obvious safety issues for angiotensin II.

    “After a small, short-term pilot of 20 patients with vasodilatory (septic) shock 10 patients in each group which showed physiological efficacy without obvious safety issues [365]”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chawla, L. S., Busse, L., Brasha-Mitchell, E., Davison, D., Honiq, J., Alotaibi, Z., & Seneff, M. G.
Affiliations
  • United States Department of Veterans Affairs (US)
  • Inova Fairfax Hospital (US)
  • Riyadh Armed Forces Hospital (SA)
Corresponding author
Chawla, Lakhmir S
Venue
Critical Care
Published
2014-10-06
Volume
18
Issue
5
Pages
534-534
ISSN
1364-8535 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2031987490
Cited by
197
References
19
Citations by year
2026: 11 · 2025: 19 · 2024: 20 · 2023: 19 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 16 · 2020: 25 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 21 · 2017: 17 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1
FWCI
8.93
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Critical Care (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
George Washington University
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Hemodynamic Monitoring and Therapy
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine › Trauma, Hemostasis, Coagulopathy, Resuscitation
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Sepsis Diagnosis and Treatment
Keywords
angiotensin II, distributive shock, 30-day mortality
MeSH terms
Aged, Angiotensin II, Blood Pressure, Cardiac Output, Catecholamines, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Norepinephrine, Pilot Projects, Shock, Septic, Vasoconstrictor Agents, Treatment Outcome, Administration, Intravenous

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review