Skip to main content

Treatment with angiotensin II in COVID-19 patients may not be beneficial

Dear Editor,

We read with great interest the recent article by Zangrillo et al. regarding infusion of angiotensin II (ANGII) in COVID-19 [1], stating that ANGII vasopressor treatment may be logical in the setting of COVID-19 patients requiring vasopressor support. The authors refer to the ATHOSIII trial as support for the use of ANGII in catecholamine-resistant vasodilatory shock despite the known concern for thrombotic and infectious complications associated with ANGII [2]. In addition, the authors suggest to use ANGII in COVID-19 patients recently exposed to angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors. We believe that both these statements raise some concern.

SARS-CoV-1 downregulates ACE2 with a subsequent increase in ANGII levels creating a disruption akin to over activating the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) [3]. In a recent COVID-19 case series, ANGII levels were markedly elevated and linearly associated with viral load and lung injury [4]. Moreover, in a prepublished report currently under journal review, infusion of ANGII in a porcine model rapidly (within hours) induced a clinical syndrome closely reflecting the one seen in COVID-19 patients, including histological changes in the lungs with severe thickening of the alveolar walls, possible hyaline membranes, and clotting of vessels, as previously reported in the human COVID-19 phenotype [5].

We suggest that much of the pathophysiology in ICU patients with COVID-19 is potentially driven by a loss of the inhibition of the RAAS, causing supranormal concentrations of ANGII [5]. In our opinion, the use of ANGII in COVID-19 patients is therefore at present most questionable. Rather, we propose further evaluation of a plausible contributing mechanism of RAAS behind pathophysiology seen in COVID-19.

Authors’ response

We thank Dr. Rysz and colleagues for their correspondence [6].

In response, we note that their concerns about the increased risk of thrombosis and infection with angiotensin II have no statistical substance. In addition, for objectivity, other adverse effects would also have to be similarly considered, such as a 34% reduction in adverse effects leading to discontinuation compared to placebo, or the 34% reduction in respiratory adverse events, or the absolute 6.4% reduction in serious adverse events compared to placebo [7].

The endocytosis of ACE2 following contact with the COVID-19 virus could be decreased by conformational changes in ACE2 secondary to angiotensin II binding to it. In addition, such binding could itself decrease the ability of the virus to bind to the receptor and enter the cell. Such hypothetical interactions, however, remain unmeasured. Moreover, it is not a surprise that angiotensin II levels are higher in patients with greater viral load and illness severity. Such high levels can easily represent the response to inflammatory vasodilatation and the body’s attempt to restore perfusion pressure.

Finally, the infusion of angiotensin II in the porcine model cited by the correspondents is clearly irrelevant to angiotensin therapy in humans as described in our report [1]. We administered 20 ng/kg/min [1], while the investigators escalated to 80 ng/kg/min within 60 min and then all the way to 240 ng/kg/min. In other animals, the dose was up to 640 ng/kg/min. At such toxic doses which were 10 to 30 times those administered to our patients, it is no surprise that toxic, even lethal side effects developed.

Until more relevant experiments are performed or clear evidence emerges that angiotensin II infusion is injurious in COVID-19 patients, the data are strong that angiotensin II is a safe and effective vasopressor agent [8] especially in patients with high renin levels [9].

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

References

  1. 1.

    Zangrillo A, Landoni G, Beretta L, Morselli F, Serpa Neto A, Bellomo R, et al. Angiotensin II infusion in COVID-19-associated vasodilatory shock: a case series. Crit Care. 2020;24:227. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-020-02928-0.

  2. 2.

    Farina N, Bixby A, Alaniz C, Angiotensin II. Brings more questions than answers. P T. 2018;43:685–7.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  3. 3.

    Gheblawi M, Wang K, Viveiros A, Nguyen Q, Zhong J-C, Turner AJ, et al. Angiotensin-converting enzyme 2: SARS-CoV-2 receptor and regulator of the renin-angiotensin system: celebrating the 20th anniversary of the discovery of ACE2. Circ Res. 2020;126:1456–74.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  4. 4.

    Liu Y, Yang Y, Zhang C, Huang F, Wang F, Yuan J, et al. Clinical and biochemical indexes from 2019-nCoV infected patients linked to viral loads and lung injury. Sci China Life Sci. 2020;63:364–74.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Rysz S, Al-Saadi J, Farm M et al. COVID-19 pathophysiology may be driven by a loss of inhibition of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system. PREPRINT (Version 2) available at Research Square. https://doi.org/10.21203/rs.3.rs-32494/v2.

  6. 6.

    Rysz S, Campoccia Jalde F, Oldner A, et al. Treatment with angiotensin II in COVID-19 patients may not be beneficial. Crit Care. 2020.

  7. 7.

    Khanna A, English SW, Wang XS, et al. Angiotensin II for the treatment of vasodilatory shock. N Engl J Med. 2017;377:419–30.

    CAS  Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Bellomo R, Hilton A. The ATHOS-3 trial, angiotensin II and the three musketeers. Crit Care Resusc. 2017;19:3–4.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Bellomo R, Forni LG, Busse LW et al. Renin and survival in patients given angiotensin II for catecholamine-resistant vasodilatory shock. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2020. Online ahead of print.

Download references

Acknowledgements

Not applicable

Funding

JL was supported by the Stockholm Region Clinical Postdoc program and MedTech Labs at Karolinska Institutet.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

SR, JL, and MJF drafted the paper. All authors critically reviewed the manuscript. All authors read and approved the final version of the manuscript.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Malin Jonsson Fagerlund.

Ethics declarations

Ethics approval and consent to participate

Not applicable.

Consent for publication

Not applicable.

Competing interests

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Open Access This 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.

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Rysz, S., Jalde, F.C., Oldner, A. et al. Treatment with angiotensin II in COVID-19 patients may not be beneficial. Crit Care 24, 546 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1186/s13054-020-03233-6

Download citation