RAAS inhibitors in pregnancy, breastfeeding and women of childbearing potential: a review of national and international clinical practice guidelines

Introduction

Cardiovascular and renal diseases pose significant health challenges globally, including conditions such as hypertension, heart failure, ischaemic heart disease (IHD), and chronic kidney disease (CKD). These conditions require careful management throughout life, but particularly during pregnancy to preserve the health of both the mother and the fetus [1].

Blockers of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS), consisting of direct renin inhibitors (DRIs), angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs), angiotensin II receptor blockers (ARBs) and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) have been integral in the treatment of cardiovascular and renal conditions [2]. They are often used as a first-line treatment for these conditions, especially in younger individuals, but are contraindicated during pregnancy due to their adverse effect on fetal development.

The fetal RAAS plays a crucial role in blood pressure and electrolyte regulation, blood vessel growth, lung and kidney development. Blocking the RAAS causes hypoperfusion of the fetal kidney, which in turn causes anuria, and therefore results in an insufficient amniotic fluid volume in the amniotic sac. Treatment with ACEIs and ARBs can cause renal tubular dysplasia, lung hypoplasia, problems with skull formation and refractory hypotension in the fetus as a result [3]. Fetal malformations resulting from RAAS blockade are linked to inhibition of RAAS activity during the later stages of pregnancy due to differing expression of fetal AT1 and AT2 receptors throughout gestation [4].

Clinical guidelines advise against the use of these drugs for individuals planning a pregnancy or during pregnancy. However, the degree to which the nuanced issue of prescription to women of childbearing potential, planning a pregnancy and pregnancy itself is addressed and justified by current clinical recommendations for the use of RAAS blockers deserves investigation.

This investigation is particularly relevant in instances where a woman may be pregnant, and (due to delayed awareness or a lack of knowledge of the risks) continues to take RAAS blockers and compromise the health of the fetus. Some clinicians may argue that prescribing RAAS blockers to any woman of childbearing age is therefore not appropriate. Inconsistencies also extend to advice on contraception for those who are on RAAS blockers and breastfeeding. For this report we reviewed examples of existing clinical guidelines (Provided in Supplementary Table 1).

Pregnancy

Guidance overall varies in the inclusion or non-inclusion of pregnancy (Table 1). Hypertension guidance from the National Institutes of Health and Care Excellence (NICE) [5, 6], European Society of Hypertension (ESH) [7], European Society of Cardiology (ESC) [8] and the American Heart Association and American College of Cardiology (AHA/ACC) [9] contains considerations of pregnancy and RAAS blockers comprehensively and includes details on prohibition and associated risks. This may be attributed to its high prevalence and broader impact on maternal and fetal health as a risk factor for other conditions. Specific guidance on the treatment of hypertension and other cardiovascular diseases is available from NICE [6] and the ESC [10] whilst the ESH published a position paper with detailed information but without having guideline status [11]. Details on hypertension guidance can be found in Supplementary Table 2.

Table 1 An overview of notable aspects of pregnancy in relation to renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS) blockade covered by published clinical guidelines.
Full size table

More variability in recommendations can be observed across other cardiovascular and renal conditions. For example, the NICE 2018 guidelines for heart failure management [12] caution against pregnancy for those of childbearing potential with heart failure. The 2018 NICE guidance has no mention of specific considerations regarding RAAS blockers above the level of pregnancy contraindication. The 2021 ESC heart failure guidelines [13] and the 2018 ESC cardiovascular disease in pregnancy guidelines [10] detail specifically mention pre-pregnancy management of existing medications. This contrasts the AHA/ACC 2022 heart failure guidance [14], which details the risks associated with RAAS blockers and does not mention the avoidance of pregnancy (Supplementary Table 3). The comparatively limited guidance for heart failure might indicate the complexity of managing this condition in pregnancy, especially in severe cases, where the focus revolves around advising against pregnancy. Similarly, while NICE [15] and ESC [16] guidelines lack any pregnancy related IHD guidance, the AHA/ACC [17] guidance offer comprehensive recommendations, strongly advising against RAAS blockers during pregnancy, detailing potential fetal harm and recommending multidisciplinary preconception care in women with IHD (Supplementary Table 4). This same picture can be seen in NICE guidelines for the management of CKD [18], which do not include pregnancy considerations whereas guidance from The Renal Association 2019 [19] and Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) 2024 [19] highlights the teratogenic profile of RAAS blockers and includes comprehensive and personalised pregnancy management recommendations. Moreover, The Renal Association 2019 [20] guidelines have detailed recommendations for pre-pregnancy counselling and medication management in women of childbearing potential (Supplementary Table 5). IHD is the number one cause of fatalities in women globally [21]. The lack of detailed guidance or consensus on managing IHD during pregnancy poses a challenge.

There are conditions that may present compelling indications for RAAS-blocking agents, for example, mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) in primary aldosteronism secondary to adenoma, hyperplasia or familial types. Women of childbearing potential living with these conditions would be at risk of adverse effects of MRAs in pregnancy, but may also benefit from pregnancy due to progesterone physiologically acting as MRA [22, 23], emphasising the importance of individualised decision-making [24].

Childbearing potential and contraception

Guidelines concerning women of childbearing potential and RAAS blockers vary in the recommendations. While NICE [5] recommends treating hypertension based on general adult guidelines, the guidance lacks explicit contraception or counselling advice. Comparatively, the KDIGO 2024 CKD guidance [20] specifically refers to childbearing potential and advocates for a multidisciplinary, individualised approach where contraception and preconception counselling are considered. The Renal Association [19] also offers detailed directives for women of childbearing potential, with guidance recommending a discussion of a personalised plan for discontinuation, governed by the likelihood of pregnancy and the level need for the medication. The ESH hypertension and cardiovascular disease in pregnancy position paper [11] advises caution in prescribing ACEIs and ARBs to women “without reliable contraception” and includes directives for patients who have unknowingly been exposed to these medications in pregnancy. Conversely, the ACC/AHA hypertension guideline [9] has no specific statement on childbearing potential other than strictly prohibiting RAAS blockers during pregnancy. The absence of consideration for women of childbearing potential in the NICE and ACC/AHA guidelines may still signal a distinction in treatment between pregnant and non-pregnant women but allows a broader scope of discretion for clinicians and may contribute to avoidable sex-based health inequalities. Zhao et al. 2020 [25] found significant disparities in medication prescription between sexes, with women being less likely to receive ACEIs than men, highlighting the need for documented counselling and contraception advice.

Discontinuation of RAAS blockers upon notification of pregnancy and suitable replacements

The 2019 NICE guidance for hypertension [5] advises discontinuing RAAS blockers within “2 working days of notification of pregnancy”. Similarly, The Renal Association [19] recommends the same timeframe of two days of notification of pregnancy for women with CKD. In contrast, the 2023 ESH hypertension guidance [7] suggests discontinuation of RAAS blockers in the first trimester (Supplementary Table 2). The 2021 and 2018 heart failure guidance from ESC [13] advises that RAAS blockers should be stopped prior to conception and includes recommendations for situations where the medication may have been unknowingly taken during the first trimester (Supplementary Table 3). KDIGO 2024 guidelines [20] recommend discontinuation of ACEis and ARBs during pregnancy with no specific timeframe indicated. A 2010 UK survey found that 86% of women sought prenatal care by gestational week 12, indicating a potential delay in care for 14% of participants until after the first trimester [26].

Research suggests that there may be potential risks even in early pregnancy stages [3], aligning with NICE’s specific timeline for discontinuation. In terms of an unplanned pregnancy, the lack of clear directives from NICE in other condition-specific guidelines, specifically for heart failure, IHD and CKD may lead to delays in appropriate care (Supplementary Tables 3–5). Additionally, the absence of precise timelines in these guidelines may cause variations in clinical decision-making.

The recommended replacement medication for women who are pregnant or planning a pregnancy shows some uniformity across guidelines and conditions. The NICE hypertension guidelines [5, 6] currently recommend labetalol, nifedipine and methyldopa as equally suitable replacements for RAAS blocker medication during pregnancy. This recommendation from NICE is similar to the corresponding European and US hypertension guidelines. However, the European hypertension guidelines expand on this by evaluating the safety evidence for each medication, with labetalol and nifedipine being reported to have the most safety evidence.

The ongoing Giant PANDA trial [27] aims to further inform treatment by comparing the effect of labetalol and nifedipine for managing high blood pressure during pregnancy. This currently recruiting trial may have the potential to shape future NICE guidance on this topic.

Lactation and breastfeeding

Recommendations on RAAS blocker prescription during breastfeeding vary among guidelines. While AHA/ACC hypertension guidelines [9] and KDIGO CKD guidelines [20] offer comprehensive coverage, NICE and ESH provide some less detailed guidance on breastfeeding in the hypertension guidelines. NICE guidance states that ACEIs and ARBs are not advised but not absolutely prohibited during breastfeeding but does not specify specific drug names [5]. The 2023 hypertension guidance from the ESH states that “ACEis are compatible with breastfeeding… ARBs are not currently recommended in lactating women because of limited safety evidence” [7] (Supplementary Table 2). The recent 2024 ESC hypertension guidelines also include the specific medication names (Benazepril, captopril, enalapril, quinapril) [8]. Furthermore, both the AHA/ACC guidance for heart failure [14] and IHD guidelines [17] state that enalapril, benazepril and captopril are safe during breastfeeding and lactation in contrast with the NICE guidance (Supplementary Tables 3 and 4). This guidance from the AHA/ACC is reinforced by research showing that drug levels of these ACEIs in breastmilk are low enough that it does not pose any danger on the infant [28, 29]. Similarly, the KDIGO 2024 CKD guidelines [20] advocate for a multidisciplinary care approach where medication charts are reviewed throughout lactation as well as throughout pregnancy. This comparison highlights the inconsistency between the more detailed international guidance and the NICE guidelines. Additionally, specifically addressing prematurity in the guidance may be beneficial, as premature infants are more sensitive to RAAS modulations and build-up of drugs [30].

Summary

There are disparities in the depth and extent of national and international guidance concerning the use of RAAS blockers during pregnancy and breastfeeding. This presents a challenge, as it demonstrates that there is a lack of standardised and comprehensive guidance on this topic across international levels and suggests that there is a requirement for more explicit directives in the clinical guidelines aimed at pregnant women and women of childbearing potential.

The position statement by the ESH Working Group on Hypertension in Women reinforces the importance of multidisciplinary approaches to hypertensive disorders in pregnancy and attributes the lack of standardised disease management to the multifaceted nature of hypertensive disorders in pregnancy and the scarcity of well-designed clinical trials in the field [11]. Building on this, we recommend that in future iterations and updates of clinical guidelines for the management of cardiovascular and renal conditions that explicit and detailed directives regarding the use of RAAS blockers for both pregnant women and women of childbearing potential are provided, with an emphasis on the importance of appropriate contraception and preconception counselling. Additionally, we recommend that guidance regarding breastfeeding and lactation is clear and includes information on the evidenced safety of specific drugs and further research into the safety of RAAS blockers in breastfeeding. These recommendations will provide healthcare professionals with improved resources to facilitate informed decision-making and patient counselling regarding RAAS blocker treatment during pregnancy and breastfeeding.

Related Articles

Iron homeostasis and ferroptosis in muscle diseases and disorders: mechanisms and therapeutic prospects

The muscular system plays a critical role in the human body by governing skeletal movement, cardiovascular function, and the activities of digestive organs. Additionally, muscle tissues serve an endocrine function by secreting myogenic cytokines, thereby regulating metabolism throughout the entire body. Maintaining muscle function requires iron homeostasis. Recent studies suggest that disruptions in iron metabolism and ferroptosis, a form of iron-dependent cell death, are essential contributors to the progression of a wide range of muscle diseases and disorders, including sarcopenia, cardiomyopathy, and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Thus, a comprehensive overview of the mechanisms regulating iron metabolism and ferroptosis in these conditions is crucial for identifying potential therapeutic targets and developing new strategies for disease treatment and/or prevention. This review aims to summarize recent advances in understanding the molecular mechanisms underlying ferroptosis in the context of muscle injury, as well as associated muscle diseases and disorders. Moreover, we discuss potential targets within the ferroptosis pathway and possible strategies for managing muscle disorders. Finally, we shed new light on current limitations and future prospects for therapeutic interventions targeting ferroptosis.

Type 2 immunity in allergic diseases

Significant advancements have been made in understanding the cellular and molecular mechanisms of type 2 immunity in allergic diseases such as asthma, allergic rhinitis, chronic rhinosinusitis, eosinophilic esophagitis (EoE), food and drug allergies, and atopic dermatitis (AD). Type 2 immunity has evolved to protect against parasitic diseases and toxins, plays a role in the expulsion of parasites and larvae from inner tissues to the lumen and outside the body, maintains microbe-rich skin and mucosal epithelial barriers and counterbalances the type 1 immune response and its destructive effects. During the development of a type 2 immune response, an innate immune response initiates starting from epithelial cells and innate lymphoid cells (ILCs), including dendritic cells and macrophages, and translates to adaptive T and B-cell immunity, particularly IgE antibody production. Eosinophils, mast cells and basophils have effects on effector functions. Cytokines from ILC2s and CD4+ helper type 2 (Th2) cells, CD8 + T cells, and NK-T cells, along with myeloid cells, including IL-4, IL-5, IL-9, and IL-13, initiate and sustain allergic inflammation via T cell cells, eosinophils, and ILC2s; promote IgE class switching; and open the epithelial barrier. Epithelial cell activation, alarmin release and barrier dysfunction are key in the development of not only allergic diseases but also many other systemic diseases. Recent biologics targeting the pathways and effector functions of IL4/IL13, IL-5, and IgE have shown promising results for almost all ages, although some patients with severe allergic diseases do not respond to these therapies, highlighting the unmet need for a more detailed and personalized approach.

GluN2B-mediated regulation of silent synapses for receptor specification and addiction memory

Psychostimulants, including cocaine, elicit stereotyped, addictive behaviors. The reemergence of silent synapses containing only NMDA-type glutamate receptors is a critical mediator of addiction memory and seeking behaviors. Despite the predominant abundance of GluN2B-containing NMDA-type glutamate receptors in silent synapses, their operational mechanisms are not fully understood. Here, using conditional depletion/deletion of GluN2B in D1-expressing accumbal medium spiny neurons, we examined the synaptic and behavioral actions that silent synapses incur after repeated exposure to cocaine. GluN2B ablation reduces the proportion of silent synapses, but some of them can persist by substitution with GluN2C, which drives the aberrantly facilitated synaptic incorporation of calcium-impermeable AMPA-type glutamate receptors (AMPARs). The resulting precocious maturation of silent synapses impairs addiction memory but increases locomotor activity, both of which can be normalized by the blockade of calcium-impermeable AMPAR trafficking. Collectively, GluN2B supports the competence of cocaine-induced silent synapses to specify the subunit composition of AMPARs and thereby the expression of addiction memory and related behaviors.

Targeting of TAMs: can we be more clever than cancer cells?

With increasing incidence and geography, cancer is one of the leading causes of death, reduced quality of life and disability worldwide. Principal progress in the development of new anticancer therapies, in improving the efficiency of immunotherapeutic tools, and in the personification of conventional therapies needs to consider cancer-specific and patient-specific programming of innate immunity. Intratumoral TAMs and their precursors, resident macrophages and monocytes, are principal regulators of tumor progression and therapy resistance. Our review summarizes the accumulated evidence for the subpopulations of TAMs and their increasing number of biomarkers, indicating their predictive value for the clinical parameters of carcinogenesis and therapy resistance, with a focus on solid cancers of non-infectious etiology. We present the state-of-the-art knowledge about the tumor-supporting functions of TAMs at all stages of tumor progression and highlight biomarkers, recently identified by single-cell and spatial analytical methods, that discriminate between tumor-promoting and tumor-inhibiting TAMs, where both subtypes express a combination of prototype M1 and M2 genes. Our review focuses on novel mechanisms involved in the crosstalk among epigenetic, signaling, transcriptional and metabolic pathways in TAMs. Particular attention has been given to the recently identified link between cancer cell metabolism and the epigenetic programming of TAMs by histone lactylation, which can be responsible for the unlimited protumoral programming of TAMs. Finally, we explain how TAMs interfere with currently used anticancer therapeutics and summarize the most advanced data from clinical trials, which we divide into four categories: inhibition of TAM survival and differentiation, inhibition of monocyte/TAM recruitment into tumors, functional reprogramming of TAMs, and genetic enhancement of macrophages.

Integrated proteogenomic characterization of ampullary adenocarcinoma

Ampullary adenocarcinoma (AMPAC) is a rare and heterogeneous malignancy. Here we performed a comprehensive proteogenomic analysis of 198 samples from Chinese AMPAC patients and duodenum patients. Genomic data illustrate that 4q loss causes fatty acid accumulation and cell proliferation. Proteomic analysis has revealed three distinct clusters (C-FAM, C-AD, C-CC), among which the most aggressive cluster, C-AD, is associated with the poorest prognosis and is characterized by focal adhesion. Immune clustering identifies three immune clusters and reveals that immune cluster M1 (macrophage infiltration cluster) and M3 (DC cell infiltration cluster), which exhibit a higher immune score compared to cluster M2 (CD4+ T-cell infiltration cluster), are associated with a poor prognosis due to the potential secretion of IL-6 by tumor cells and its consequential influence. This study provides a comprehensive proteogenomic analysis for seeking for better understanding and potential treatment of AMPAC.

Responses

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *