↓ Skip to main content

The effect of angiotensin II on blood pressure in patients with circulatory shock: a structured review of the literature

Overview of attention for article published in Critical Care, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (88th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

news
1 news outlet
blogs
1 blog
twitter
1 X user
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
46 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
74 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The effect of angiotensin II on blood pressure in patients with circulatory shock: a structured review of the literature
Published in
Critical Care, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13054-017-1896-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Laurence W. Busse, Michael T. McCurdy, Osman Ali, Anna Hall, Huaizhen Chen, Marlies Ostermann

Abstract

Circulatory shock is a common syndrome with a high mortality and limited therapeutic options. Despite its discovery and use in clinical and experimental settings more than a half-century ago, angiotensin II (Ang II) has only been recently evaluated as a vasopressor in distributive shock. We examined existing literature for associations between Ang II and the resolution of circulatory shock. We searched PubMed, MEDLINE, Ovid, and Embase to identify all English literature accounts of intravenous Ang II in humans for the treatment of shock (systolic blood pressure [SBP] ≤ 90 mmHg or a mean arterial pressure [MAP] ≤ 65 mmHg), and hand-searched the references of extracted papers for further studies meeting inclusion criteria. Of 3743 articles identified, 24 studies including 353 patients met inclusion criteria. Complete data existed for 276 patients. Extracted data included study type, publication year, demographics, type of shock, dosing of Ang II or other vasoactive medications, and changes in BP, lactate, and urine output. BP effects were grouped according to type of shock, with additional analyses completed for patients with absent blood pressure. Shock was distributive (n = 225), cardiogenic (n = 38), or from other causes (n = 90). Blood pressure as absent in 18 patients. For the 276 patients with complete data, MAP rose by 23.4% from 63.3 mmHg to 78.1 mmHg in response to Ang II (dose range: 15 ng/kg/min to 60 mcg/min). SBP rose by 125.2% from 56.9 mmHg to 128.2 mmHg (dose range: 0.2 mcg/min to a 1500 mcg bolus). A total of 271 patients with complete data were determined to exhibit a BP effect which was directly associated with Ang II. Subgroups (patients with cardiogenic, septic, and other types of shock) exhibited similar increases in BP. In patients with absent BP, deemed to be cardiac arrest, return of spontaneous circulation (ROSC) was achieved, and BP increased by an average of 107.3 mmHg in 11 of 18 patients. The remaining seven patients with cardiac arrest did not respond. Intravenous Ang II is associated with increased BP in patients with cardiogenic, distributive, and unclassified shock. A role may exist for Ang II in restoring circulation in cardiac arrest.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 74 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 74 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Other 11 15%
Researcher 11 15%
Student > Bachelor 10 14%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 8%
Student > Ph. D. Student 5 7%
Other 12 16%
Unknown 19 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 31 42%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 5 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 3%
Nursing and Health Professions 2 3%
Physics and Astronomy 2 3%
Other 5 7%
Unknown 27 36%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 15. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 April 2018.
All research outputs
#2,383,752
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Critical Care
#2,082
of 6,555 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#52,277
of 448,935 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Critical Care
#63
of 90 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 90th percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 6,555 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 20.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 68% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 448,935 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 90 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 30th percentile – i.e., 30% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.