ArticleAnnals of intensive care2025
Angiotensin II, conventional vasopressor therapy, and mortality in shock: a large, multicenter, propensity score-weighted analysis.
Article in Annals of intensive care, 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.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundAngiotensin II (Ang II) is typically used in addition to adrenergic agents and vasopressin (conventional therapy) in patients with shock, but whether its use improves outcomes is unknown. RESEARCH QUESTION: We evaluated whether Ang II, when added to conventional therapy at different norepinephrine equivalent (NE) doses, was associated with mortality.
methodsWe performed a retrospective analysis of 811 patients admitted to four centers in a single healthcare system who received vasopressors for shock, including 275 who received Ang II plus conventional therapy and 536 who received only conventional therapy. Age, gender, sequential organ failure assessment score, serum lactate, background NE dose, corticosteroid use, pre-morbid angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker use, and Charlson Comorbidity Index were calculated at initiation of Ang II or at an equivalent point of acuity in the conventional therapy cohort. We used propensity scores with inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) to achieve covariate balance and multivariable logistic regression to compare 30-day mortality, further stratifying patients by 0.10 mcg/kg/min NE increments.
resultsOverall 30-day mortality was 56.4%. Groups statistically differed by all baseline variables. In multivariable logistic regression, Ang II treatment was associated with lower 30-day mortality compared to conventional therapy alone (odds ratio [OR] 0.65, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45-0.95, p = 0.025). After IPTW, Ang II use was independently associated with lower mortality (OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.55-0.99, p = 0.040). When stratifying by increments of background NE dose, Ang II initiation was associated with lower 30-day mortality compared to conventional therapy alone in patients on background NE doses > 0.4, > 0.5, and ≤ 0.6 mcg/kg/min. Ang II use in patients on background NE dose > 0.6 was not significantly associated with mortality.
conclusionsAng II administration was associated with a lower risk of death in unadjusted and adjusted analyses. This effect was preserved only with patients receiving NE at doses ranging from 0.4 to 0.6 mcg/kg/min. Though additional prospective studies are required, these findings suggest that Ang II may be beneficial across a specific range of background vasopressor doses.
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.