ReviewCureus2025
Angiotensin II in Catecholamine-Refractory Shock: A Systematic Review and Exploratory Analysis of the Angiotensin II for the Treatment of High-Output Shock (ATHOS-3) Trial.
Review in Cureus, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Five things the intensivist cannot forget in the management of septic shock.Critical care science · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Vasodilatory shock that does not respond to high-dose catecholamine vasopressors remains a life-threatening condition and is characterized by severe hypotension and high mortality. Angiotensin II, a non-catecholamine vasopressor that activates angiotensin type 1 receptors, has emerged as a potential therapeutic agent for restoring vascular tone in this setting. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the efficacy, safety, and hemodynamic effects of intravenous angiotensin II in adult patients with vasodilatory shock unresponsive to catecholamines, with a focus on data from the Angiotensin II for the Treatment of High-Output Shock (ATHOS-3) randomized trial and related studies. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines, a systematic search was performed to identify randomized controlled trials and protocol-based investigations involving angiotensin II administration in adult patients with catecholamine-refractory vasodilatory shock. Eligible studies included the ATHOS-3 randomized trial, a renal-focused post hoc analysis, and the DARK-Sepsis protocol. Extracted outcomes included the proportion of patients achieving target mean arterial pressure, changes in catecholamine dose requirements, incidence of renal replacement therapy, and adverse event profiles. Risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias 2.0 tool. Three studies involving a total of 321 patients were included. In the ATHOS-3 trial, angiotensin II significantly increased mean arterial pressure within 30 minutes. The proportion of patients achieving the target pressure threshold was 69.9% in the angiotensin II group versus 23.4% in the placebo group (P < 0.001). Angiotensin II administration was associated with a reduction in concurrent catecholamine use and a lower rate of renal replacement therapy initiation (19.0% versus 32.4%; P = 0.015). The overall incidence of adverse events, including thromboembolic and ischemic complications, did not differ significantly between groups. Exploratory findings indicated a greater therapeutic response in patients with elevated baseline plasma renin levels. All studies included were rated as low risk of bias. Angiotensin II appears to be a safe and effective adjunct to conventional vasopressor therapy in catecholamine-refractory vasodilatory shock, offering rapid hemodynamic improvement and potential organ protection. The observed reduction in renal replacement therapy initiation and the enhanced response in renin-elevated subgroups warrant further investigation in biomarker-guided clinical trials.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.