Haemodynamic effects of levosimendan in advanced but stable chronic heart failure

Novel Treatments of Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy in GDMT for Heart Failure: A State-of-art Review

This state-of-the-art review discuss the available evidence on the use of novel treatments of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy such as omecamtiv mecarbil, EMD-57033, levosimendan, pimobendan, and mavacamten for the treatment of heart failure (HF) in the context of guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT). The paper provides a detailed overview of these agents' mechanisms of action, potential benefits and limitations, and their effects on clinical outcomes. The review also evaluates the efficacy of the novel treatments in comparison to traditional medications such as digoxin. Finally, we seek to provide insight and guidance to clinicians and researchers in the management of HF patients.

Therapeutic Development of Levosimendan in Acute and Advanced Heart Failure: A Systematic Review

Levosimendan (LS) has been progressively used for the treatment of patients developing acute as well as chronic or advanced cardiac dysfunction. It has proven to be a better inotropic agent than its counterparts in terms of its ability to increase the cardiac output in an acutely or chronically decompensated heart without an increase in the myocardial oxygen demand. The purpose of this systematic review, which was carried out in accordance with Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) 2020, was to determine the efficacy and advantages of utilizing LS in patients with both acute and chronic heart failure. We collected and reviewed articles, including clinical trials, literature reviews, randomized and non-randomized control trials, case-control and cohort studies, and systematic reviews and meta-analyses published between January 1, 2012, and November 27, 2022. The databases that were used to collect these articles included Pubmed, Pubmed Central, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar. After applying appropriate filters, a total of 143 reports were identified from these four databases. They were further screened and subjected to quality assessment tools which finally yielded 21 studies that were included in this systematic review. This review provides strong evidence that the pharmacological properties and different mechanisms of action of LS give it an upper hand over other inotropic agents for its successful administration in patients with either acute or advanced cardiac failure, which consists of left as well as right ventricular failure, either individually or in combination.

Efficacy of omecamtiv mecarbil in heart failure with reduced ejection fraction according to N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide level: insights from the GALACTIC-HF trial

AIM

N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) is predictive of both outcomes and response to treatment in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). The aim of this study was to examine the effect of the cardiac myosin activator omecamtiv mecarbil according to baseline NT-proBNP level in the Global Approach to Lowering Adverse Cardiac outcomes Through Improving Contractility in Heart Failure trial (GALACTIC-HF).

METHODS AND RESULTS

The primary outcome was the composite of a worsening heart failure event (urgent clinic visit, emergency department visit, or hospitalization) or cardiovascular death. We prespecified analysis of the effect of treatment according to baseline NT-proBNP (≤ median, > median), excluding individuals with atrial fibrillation/flutter (AF/AFL). Of the 8232 patients analysed, 8206 had an available baseline NT-proBNP measurement. Among the 5971 patients not in AF/AFL, the median (Q1-Q3) NT-proBNP level was 1675 (812-3579) pg/ml. Hazard ratios (HR) for the effect of omecamtiv mecarbil, compared with placebo, for the primary endpoint in patients without AF/AFL were: ≤ median 0.94 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.80-1.09), > median 0.81 (0.73-0.90) (p-interaction = 0.095); for the overall population (including patients with AF/AFL) the HRs were ≤ median 1.01 (0.90-1.15) and > median 0.88 (0.80-0.96) (p-interaction = 0.035). There was an interaction between treatment and NT-proBNP, examined as a continuous variable, with greater effect of omecamtiv mecarbil on the primary outcome in patients with a higher baseline NT-proBNP (p-interaction = 0.086).

CONCLUSIONS

In GALACTIC-HF, the benefit of omecamtiv mecarbil appeared to be larger in patients with higher baseline NT-proBNP levels, especially in patients without AF/AFL.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT02929329; EudraCT number, 2016-002299-28.

Heart Failure Pharmacological Management: Gaps and Current Perspectives

Proper therapeutic management of patients with heart failure (HF) is a major challenge for cardiologists. Current guidelines indicate to start therapy with angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitors/angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitors (ACEi/ARNI), beta blockers (BB), mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists (MRAs) and sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors (SGLT2i) to reduce the risk of death and hospitalization due to HF. However, certain aspects still need to be defined. Current guidelines propose therapeutic algorithms based on left ventricular ejection fraction values and clinical presentations. However, these last do not always reflect the precise hemodynamic status of patients and pathophysiological mechanisms involved, particularly in the acute setting. Even in the field of chronic management there are still some critical points to discuss. The guidelines do not specify which of the four pillar drugs to start first, nor at what dosage. Some authors suggest starting with SGLT2i and BB, others with ACEi or ARNI, while one of the most recent approach proposes to start with all four drugs together at low doses. The aim of this review is to revise current gaps and perspectives regarding pharmacological therapy management in HF patients, in both the acute and chronic phase.

Association of Repetitive Dosing of Levosimendan with Reduction of NYHA Class and NT-proBNP Levels in Decompensated Heart Failure: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Background

There is evidence that repetitive administration of levosimendan can improve outcome in chronic heart failure patients.

Objective

The aim of this retrospective study was to investigate the effect of therapy with levosimendan (LEV) additional to standard medical care in patients with symptomatic heart failure (HFrEF = heart failure with reduced ejection fraction) on NYHA class, NT-proBNP values, ejection fraction (EF) and body weight.

Patients and Methods

178 participating patients (125 male, 53 female; mean age of 73 ± 13 years) were grouped according to whether LEV was given once (group 1) or repetitively (group 2). In group 2 data were analysed for first treatment with LEV (group 2a) and for the following repetitive LEV treatments (group 2b). The differentiation was required to see if there were different results for the particular groups.

Results

Repetitive dosing was given between two and 11 times, leading to 47 repetitive applications of LEV and a total of 225 (178 once + 47 repetitive) applications. The mean time between the repetitive dosing was 133 days or 4.3 months. LEV in addition to standard medical treatment was associated with reduction of NT-proBNP levels from 9138 to 7051 pg/mL (p < 0.05). The corresponding values in group 2a and group 2b were 8790–4717 pg/mL (p < 0.05) as well as 13,681–7581 pg/mL (p < 0.05). The ejection fraction measured by echocardiography improved from 30 to 38% in group 1, from 31 to 45% in group 2a and from 30 to 35% in group 2b (p < 0.05). Addition of LEV was associated with significant reduction of NYHA class and bodyweight in all groups. No adverse side effects (e.g., rhythm disorder, hypotension, electrolyte disorder) were seen.

Conclusion

LEV may be useful as an additive to standard care of treatment for patients with acute de novo decompensation due to acute heart failure as well as to prevent further deterioration in patients with chronic heart failure disease at high risk for hospitalisation. Intraindividual changes in NT-proBNP levels may be useful in decision-making about the need for additional treatment options in patients with worsening heart failure.

Current Status of Pharmacologic and Nonpharmacologic Therapy in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction

Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) is a significantly symptomatic disease and has a poor prognosis similar to that of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Contrary to HFrEF, HFpEF is difficult to diagnose, and the recommended diagnostic algorithm of HFpEF is complicated. Several therapies for HFpEF have failed to reduce mortality or morbidity. HFpEF is thought to be a complex and heterogeneous systemic disorder that has various phenotypes and multiple comorbidities. Therefore, therapeutic strategies of HFpEF need to change depending on the phenotype of the patient. This review highlights the pharmacologic and nonpharmacologic treatment of HFpEF.

Intermittent levosimendan infusion in ambulatory patients with end-stage heart failure: a systematic review and meta-analysis of 984 patients

We sought to synthesize the available evidence regarding safety and efficacy of intermittent levosimendan (LEVO) infusions in ambulatory patients with end-stage heart failure (HF). Safety and efficacy of ambulatory intermittent LEVO infusion in patients with end-stage HF are yet not established. We systematically searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, SCOPUS, Web of Science, and Cochrane databases, from inception to January 30, 2021 for studies reporting outcome of adult ambulatory patients with end-stage HF treated with intermittent LEVO infusion. Fifteen studies (8 randomized and 7 observational) comprised 984 patients (LEVO [N = 727] and controls [N = 257]) met the inclusion criteria. LEVO was associated with improved New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional class (weighted mean difference [WMD] −1.04, 95%CI: −1.70 to −0.38, p < 0.001, 5 studies, I² = 93%), improved left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (WMD 4.0%, 95%CI: 2.8% to 5.3%, p < 0.001, 6 studies, I² = 9%), and reduced BNP levels (WMD −549 pg/mL, 95%CI −866 to −233, p < 0001, 3 studies, I² = 66%). All-cause death was not different (RR 0.65, 95%CI: 0.38 to 1.093, p = 0.10, 6 studies, I² = 0), but cardiovascular death was lower on LEVO (RR 0.34, 95%CI: 0.13 to 0.87, p = 0.02, 3 studies, I² = 0) compared to controls. Furthermore, health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was improved alongside with reduced LV size following LEVO infusions. Major adverse events were not different between LEVO and placebo. In conclusion, intermittent LEVO infusions in ambulatory patients with end-stage HF is associated with less frequent cardiovascular death alongside with improved NYHA class, quality of life, BNP levels, and LV function. However, the current evidence is limited by heterogeneous and relatively small studies.

Levosimendan use in patients with acute heart failure and reduced ejection fraction with or without severe renal dysfunction in critical cardiac care units: a multi-institution database study

Background

Acute heart failure is a life-threatening clinical condition. Levosimendan is an effective inotropic agent used to maintain cardiac output, but its usage is limited by the lack of evidence in patients with severely abnormal renal function. Therefore, we analyzed data of patients with acute heart failure with and without abnormal renal function to examine the effects of levosimendan.

Methods

We performed this retrospective cohort study using data from the Chang Gung Research Database (CGRD) of Chang Gung Memorial Hospital (CGMH). Patients admitted for heart failure with LVEF ≤ 40% between January 2013 and December 2018 who received levosimendan or dobutamine in the critical cardiac care units (CCU) were identified. Patients with extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) were excluded. Outcomes of interest were mortality at 30, 90, and 180 days after the cohort entry date.

Results

There were no significant differences in mortality rate at 30, 90, and 180 days after the cohort entry date between the levosimendan and dobutamine groups, or between subgroups of patients with an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) ≥ 30 mL/min/1.73 m² and eGFR < 30 mL/min/1.73 m² or on dialysis. The results were consistent before and after propensity score matching.

Conclusions

Levosimendan did not increase short- or long-term mortality rates in critical patients with acute heart failure and reduced ejection fraction compared to dobutamine, regardless of their renal function. An eGFR less than 30 mL/min/1.73 m² was not necessarily considered a contraindication for levosimendan in these patients.

Effects of Levosimendan on cardiac function, size and strain in heart failure patients

Levosimendan improves cardiac function in heart failure populations; however, its exact mechanism is not well defined. We analysed the short-term impact of levosimendan in heart failure patients with ischemic and non-ischemic cardiomyopathy (CMP) using multiparametric cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR). We identified 33 patients with ischemic or non-ischemic CMP who received two consecutive CMR scans prior to and within one week after levosimendan administration. Changes in LV ejection fraction (LVEF) and LV volumes, as well as changes in strain rates, were measured prior to and within one week after levosimendan infusion. LV scarring, based on late gadolinium enhancement (LGE), was correlated to changes in LV size and strain rates. Both LV endiastolic (EDV) and endsystolic volumes (ESV) significantly decreased (EDV: p=0,001; ESV: p=0,002) after levosimendan administration, with no significant impact on LVEF (p=0.41), cardiac output (p=0.61), and strain rates. Subgroup analyses of ischemic or non-ischemic CMP showed no significant differences between the groups in terms of short-term LV reverse remodeling. The presence and extent of scarring in LGE did not correlate with changes in LV size and strain rates. CMR is able to monitor cardiac effects of levosimendan infusion. Short-term follow-up of a single levosimendan infusion using CMR shows a significant decrease in LV size, but no impact on LVEF or strain measurements. There was no difference between patients with ischemic or non-ischemic CMP. Quantification of LV scarring in CMR is not able to predict changes in LV size and strain rates in response to levosimendan.

Haemodynamic Balance in Acute and Advanced Heart Failure: An Expert Perspective on the Role of Levosimendan

Acute and advanced heart failure are associated with substantial adverse short- and longer-term prognosis. Both conditions necessitate complex treatment choices to restore haemodynamic stability and organ perfusion, relieve congestion, improve symptoms and allow the patient to leave the hospital and achieve an adequate quality of life. Among the available intravenous vasoactive therapies, inotropes constitute an option when an increase in cardiac contractility is needed to reverse a low output state. Within the inotrope category, levosimendan is well suited to the needs of both sets of patients since, in contrast to conventional adrenergic inotropes, it has not been linked in clinical trials or wider clinical usage with increased mortality risk and retains its efficacy in the presence of beta-adrenergic receptor blockade; it is further believed to possess beneficial renal effects. The overall haemodynamic profile and clinical tolerability of levosimendan, combined with its extended duration of action, have encouraged its intermittent use in patients with advanced heart failure. This paper summarises the key messages derived from a series of 12 tutorials held at the Heart Failure 2019 congress organised in Athens, Greece, by the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology.

Haemodynamic effects of levosimendan in advanced but stable chronic heart failure

AIMS

Levosimendan improves haemodynamics in acute decompensated heart failure (HF). However, it is increasingly used for repetitive or intermittent infusions in advanced but stable chronic HF, without clear indication, selection criteria, or effect. We tested the hypotheses that (1) levosimendan improves haemodynamics in stable chronic HF and (2) that the response is dependent on baseline clinical and haemodynamic factors.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Twenty-three patients [median age 56 (49-64) years, four (17%) women] with stable New York Heart Association (NYHA) III and IV HF received a single 24 h levosimendan infusion. Non-invasive haemodynamics (inert gas re-breathing technique), estimated glomerular filtration rate, and N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide were assessed before and after infusion. Levosimendan had the following effects (median change): a significant increase in cardiac output (+9.8 ± 21.6%; P = 0.026) and decrease in N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide (-28.1 ± 16.3%, P < 0.001), estimated total peripheral resistance (-16.9 ± 18.3%, P = 0.005), and mean arterial pressure (-5.9 ± 8.2%, P = 0.007), but no change in estimated glomerular filtration rate (+0.89 ± 14.0%, P = 0.955). There were no significant associations between baseline clinical and/or haemodynamic factors and the levosimendan effect on cardiac output.

CONCLUSIONS

Levosimendan was associated with improved haemodynamics in patients with stable chronic HF, but we could not identify any predictors of the magnitude of haemodynamic response.