Alice A. Amudzi
Giro Richard Samale2
Xavier Vela-Parada- 1Department of Internal Medicine, Berkshire Medical Center, Pittsfield, MA, United States
- 2CHP Neighborhood Health, Pittsfield, MA, United States
- 3UMass Memorial Medical Center, Worcester, MA, United States
A 47-year-old woman presents to our clinic with a chief complaint of rhinorrhea; she had chronic hypertension managed with four antihypertensive drugs, including an ACE inhibitor. While dry cough is a well-known side effect associated with ACE inhibitors, this case highlights a common chief complaint yet less recognized side effect of ACE inhibitors and further emphasizes the idea that overall, angiotensin receptor blockers may be a better drug of choice in hypertension due to their favorable side effect profile.
Introduction
Lisinopril, an ACE inhibitor, effectively manages hypertension but can cause side effects such as dry cough which is well known and upper respiratory symptoms. There is ongoing debate about whether to continue using ACE inhibitors, given the comparable effectiveness of ARBs and their favorable tolerability. This case emphasizes the importance of considering alternative treatments, such as ARBs, in patients intolerant to ACE inhibitors.
Case presentation
A 47-year-old woman with medical problems, including chronic hypertension, bipolar disorder, and substance use disorder, on methadone who presented to our clinic with a history of five years of runny nose, which she found extremely bothersome. The patient denied other symptoms such as cough, fever, facial pain, sneezing, polyps, pruritus, headaches, conjunctivitis, or sore throat. Her physical exam, including chest and EENT (Eyes, ear, nose, and throat), was unremarkable except for an erythema area from frequent nose squeezing.
Further questioning revealed that she had a sister with chronic hypertension who had rhinorrhea and nasal congestion that began a few weeks after starting lisinopril. She was evaluated multiple times at urgent care for nasal congestion with rhinorrhea with no clear etiology and provided only supportive treatment, including nasal decongestants. After several office visits by her sister's new primary care physician, on her first visit, was able to relate the beginning of her symptoms to the time around the lisinopril prescription. Hence, lisinopril was switched to losartan, after which her symptoms completely resolved. The patient also reported a similar history with her father, who experienced flushing and upper respiratory symptoms after starting lisinopril.
Treatment & outcome
Given her strong family history and no indication for further labs, our treatment plan was to substitute lisinopril with losartan and review her case in 2 weeks. She was amenable to the treatment and followed through with her prescription, and 2-weeks later, she reported a significant improvement in her rhinorrhea and a complete resolution of her symptoms in 4 weeks.
Discussion
Lisinopril belongs to a class of medications called ACE inhibitors used in the management of hypertension, heart failure, and diabetic nephropathy. While it is a relatively safe and efficacious drug, its side effects include dry cough (1, 2), angioedema (3–5), acute kidney injury (6), hyperkalemia (7), and oro-esophageal pemphigus (8, 9). It works by inhibiting the conversion of angiotensin I to angiotensin II to regulate blood pressure. Lisinopril may result in the accumulation of bradykinin and substance P, which increases vascular permeability and leakage of fluid from blood vessels into the surrounding tissues.
In the upper respiratory tract, this later mechanism is thought to mediate symptoms like reported postnasal drainage, rhinitis, and rhinorrhea (10, 11). Even though the exact incidence of such reported cases is unknown, there usually lies a diagnostic challenge as potential etiologies may fall under allergic, non-allergic, or both (10, 12–14). Upper respiratory tract-related illness is among the three top diagnoses in outpatient settings in the USA, and having a broad differential is crucial in providing the standard of care patients deserve and avoiding unnecessary diagnostic testing.
ACE inhibitor-induced cough is widely known by most clinicians. However, being aware of common yet less frequently recognized ACE inhibitor-induced upper respiratory symptoms such as nasal blockage, rhinitis, or postnasal drainage is essential. It is important to note that not everyone using ACE-Is will experience rhinorrhea or upper respiratory symptoms, and some studies suggest a genetic predisposition, which could have been the case for our patient, given her strong family history (15). The severity of this side effect can vary among individuals.
Also, with the increasing prevalence of hypertension (16–20), notwithstanding the decreased morbidity and mortality with ACE-I use (21), there is an ongoing debate in the research community, as well as clinical trials on whether or not to keep using ACE-Is especially since ARBs are reasonably comparable in effectiveness and may be a favorable choice in terms of tolerability and strong evidence for end-organ protection (22–25).
In summary, upper respiratory tract symptoms, including rhinorrhea, are common presenting symptoms in the outpatient, and this case highlights the importance of having a broad differential. Based on ongoing clinical evidence, we favor the use of ARBs over ACE-Is when indicated in the management of hypertension and renal disease, more so in patients who are intolerant to ACE inhibitors.
Patient perspective
The Patient was appreciative of the medication change. Her symptoms resolved and she stated that “I feel that someone actually listened to me. Thank you. Doctor”.
Data availability statement
The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/Supplementary Material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.
Ethics statement
Written informed consent was obtained from the individual(s) for the publication of any potentially identifiable images or data included in this article.
Author contributions
AA: Writing – original draft, Writing – review & editing. GS: Writing – review & editing. XV: Writing – review & editing.
Funding
The author(s) declare that no financial support was received for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
Publisher's note
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.
References
1. Shah R, Segal MS, Wilkowski MJ. Case report of spontaneous remission of biopsy-proven idiopathic immune complex-mediated membranoproliferative glomerulonephritis. Case Rep Nephrol Dial. (2017) 7(2):81–90. doi: 10.1159/000477660
2. Nazir A, Sheikh FM, Aslam S, Javaid U. Ace inhibitors. Prof Med J. (2016) 23(9):1145–8. doi: 10.29309/tpmj/2016.23.09.1712
3. Whitehead WJ, Reid JM. Underreported risk of lisinopril-induced angioedema in a veteran population. Ann Pharmacother. (2022) 56(4):430–5. doi: 10.1177/10600280211032404
4. Johnson BW, Rydburg AM, Do VD. Lisinopril-induced small bowel angioedema: an unusual cause of severe abdominal pain. Am J Case Rep. (2022) 23:e937895. doi: 10.12659/ajcr.937895
5. Jani C, Walker A, Ahmed A, Rupal A, Patel D, Agarwal L, et al. Lisinopril induced visceral angioedema. Res Health Sci. (2021) 6(3):16. doi: 10.22158/rhs.v6n3p16
6. McNaughton CD, Collins SP, Lindenfeld J, Morrison RD, Daniels J, Wang TJ. 40EMF outpatient lisinopril and losartan blood levels are associated with in-hospital acute kidney injury among patients with acute heart failure. Ann Emerg Med. (2018) 72(4):S19. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2018.08.045
7. Johnson ES, Weinstein JR, Thorp ML, Platt RW, Petrik AF, Yang X, et al. Predicting the risk of hyperkalemia in patients with chronic kidney disease starting lisinopril. Pharmacoepidemiol Drug Saf. (2010) 19(3):266–72. doi: 10.1002/pds.1923
8. Tariq U, Nasrullah A, Guha A, Mitre M. Oroesophageal pemphigus vulgaris secondary to lisinopril use: a new side effect. Cureus. (2021) 13(4):e14333. doi: 10.7759/cureus.14333
9. Tariq U, Guha A, Raja A, Mitre M. S1930 lisinopril-induced oroesophageal pemphigus vulgaris: a previously unreported side effect. Am J Gastroenterol. (2020) 115(1):S1004. doi: 10.14309/01.ajg.0000709768.07287.a5
10. Alromaih S, Alsagaf L, Aloraini N, Alrasheed A, Alroqi A, Aloulah M, et al. Drug-induced rhinitis: narrative review. Ear Nose Throat J. (2022):1455613221141214. doi: 10.1177/01455613221141214
11. Pinargote P, Guillen D, Guarderas JC. ACE Inhibitors: upper respiratory symptoms. BMJ Case Rep. (2014) 2014(jul17 1):bcr2014205462. doi: 10.1136/bcr-2014-205462
12. Avdeeva KS, Fokkens WJ, Segboer CL, Reitsma S. The prevalence of non-allergic rhinitis phenotypes in the general population: a cross-sectional study. Allergy. (2022) 77(7):2163–74. doi: 10.1111/all.15223
13. Dykewicz MS, Wallace DV, Amrol DJ, Baroody FM, Bernstein JA, Craig TJ, et al. Rhinitis 2020: a practice parameter update. J Allergy Clin Immunol. (2020) 146(4):721–67. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2020.07.007
14. Zicari AM, De Castro G, Leonardi L, Duse M. Update on rhinitis and rhinosinusitis. Pediatr Allergy Immunol. (2020) 31(Suppl 24):32–3. doi: 10.1111/pai.13164
15. Evans WE, McLeod HL. Pharmacogenomics — drug disposition, drug targets, and side effects. N Engl J Med. (2003) 348(6):538–49. doi: 10.1056/nejmra020526
16. Ezeala-Adikaibe BA, Mbadiwe CN, Okafor UH, Nwobodo UM, Okwara CC, Okoli CP, et al. Prevalence of hypertension in a rural community in southeastern Nigeria; an opportunity for early intervention. J Hum Hypertens. (2023) 37(8):694–700. doi: 10.1038/s41371-023-00833-x
17. Basta K, Ledwaba-Chapman L, Dodhia H, Ashworth M, Whitney D, Dalrymple K, et al. Hypertension prevalence, coding and control in an urban primary care setting in the UK between 2014 and 2021. J Hypertens. (2024) 42(2):350–9. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000003584
18. Yamada M, Wachsmuth J, Sambharia M, Griffin BR, Swee ML, Reisinger HS, et al. The prevalence and treatment of hypertension in veterans health administration, assessing the impact of the updated clinical guidelines. J Hypertens. (2023) 41(6):995–1002. doi: 10.1097/HJH.0000000000003424
19. Ford ND, Robbins CL, Hayes DK, Ko JY, Loustalot F. Prevalence, treatment, and control of hypertension among US women of reproductive age by race/hispanic origin. Am J Hypertens. (2022) 35(8):723–30. doi: 10.1093/ajh/hpac053
20. Dutta A, Nayak G. Concerns about the prevalence estimates of undiagnosed hypertension among women aged 15–49 years in India. J Hum Hypertens. (2023) 37(6):502–3. doi: 10.1038/s41371-021-00626-0
21. Pinto B, Jadhav U, Singhai P, Sadhanandham S, Shah N. ACEI-induced cough: a review of current evidence and its practical implications for optimal CV risk reduction. Indian Heart J. (2020) 72(5):345–50. doi: 10.1016/j.ihj.2020.08.007
22. Beckett VL, Donadio JV Jr, Brennan LA Jr, Conn DL, Osmundson PJ, Chao EY, et al. Use of captopril as early therapy for renal scleroderma: a prospective study. Mayo Clin Proc. (1985) 60(11):763–71. doi: 10.1016/s0025-6196(12)60418-2
23. Sica DA, Gehr TWB, Ghosh S. Clinical pharmacokinetics of losartan. Clin Pharmacokinet. (2005) 44(8):797–814. doi: 10.2165/00003088-200544080-00003
24. Sica DA, Halstenson CE, Gehr TW, Keane WF. Pharmacokinetics and blood pressure response of losartan in end-stage renal disease. Clin Pharmacokinet. (2000) 38(6):519–26. doi: 10.2165/00003088-200038060-00005
25. Dickson TZ, Zagrobelny J, Lin CC, Ritter MA, Snavely D, Ramjit D, et al. Pharmacokinetics, safety, and antihypertensive efficacy of losartan in combination with hydrochlorothiazide in hypertensive patients with renal impairment. J Clin Pharmacol. (2003) 43(6):591–603. doi: 10.1177/0091270003253367
Keywords: angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors (ACE-I), angiotensin receptor blocker (ARB), hypertension, lisinopril, rhinorrhea
Citation: Amudzi AA, Samale GR and Vela-Parada X (2024) Case Report: Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors vs. angiotensin receptor blockers in the management of chronic hypertension: a case of lisinopril-induced rhinorrhea. Front. Allergy 5:1480569. doi: 10.3389/falgy.2024.1480569
Received: 19 August 2024; Accepted: 23 October 2024;
Published: 18 November 2024.
Edited by:
Cemal Cingi, Eskişehir Osmangazi University, TürkiyeReviewed by:
Artemii Bogomolov, National Pirogov Memorial Medical University, UkraineRamiza Ramli, Universiti Sains Malaysia Health Campus, Malaysia
Copyright: © 2024 Amudzi, Samale and Vela-Parada. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Alice A. Amudzi, YWxpY2VhbXVkemlAZ21haWwuY29t