Understanding the differences among inotropes

Diagnosis and treatment of right ventricular failure secondary to acutely increased right ventricular afterload (acute cor pulmonale): a clinical consensus statement of the Association for Acute CardioVascular Care of the European Society of Cardiology

Acute right ventricular failure secondary to acutely increased right ventricular afterload (acute cor pulmonale) is a life-threatening condition that may arise in different clinical settings. Patients at risk of developing or with manifest acute cor pulmonale usually present with an acute pulmonary disease (e.g. pulmonary embolism, pneumonia, and acute respiratory distress syndrome) and are managed initially in emergency departments and later in intensive care units. According to the clinical setting, other specialties are involved (cardiology, pneumology, internal medicine). As such, coordinated delivery of care is particularly challenging but, as shown during the COVID-19 pandemic, has a major impact on prognosis. A common framework for the management of acute cor pulmonale with inclusion of the perspectives of all involved disciplines is urgently needed.

[Dyspnea and Right Heart Failure]

Dyspnea and Right Heart Failure Abstract. Acute right ventricular failure is a critical condition diagnosed by clinical presentation combined with echocardiography. Additional diagnostic tools including laboratory, ECG, right heart catheterization, and other imaging modalities are needed to confirm the diagnosis and determine the cause. The identification and treatment of the underlying pathology, the reduction of right ventricular afterload (if possible), optimization of preload (often diuretics, rarely volume), and hemodynamic support using vasopressors and/or inodilators are mainstays of treatment. In severe cases, special therapies and mechanical circulatory support come into play.

Pulmonary Embolism and Heart Failure: A Reappraisal

Acute heart failure and acute pulmonary embolism share many features, including epidemiological aspects, clinical presentation, risk factors and pathobiological mechanisms. As such, it is not surprising that diagnosis and management of these common conditions might be challenging for the treating physician, in particular when both are concomitantly present. While helpful guidelines have been elaborated for both acute heart failure and pulmonary embolism, not many studies have been published on the coexistence of these diseases. With a special focus on diagnostic tools and therapeutic options, the authors review the available literature and, when evidence is lacking, present their own approach to the management of dyspnoeic patients with acute heart failure and pulmonary embolism.

Acute heart failure

Acute heart failure (AHF) is a syndrome defined as the new onset (de novo heart failure (HF)) or worsening (acutely decompensated heart failure (ADHF)) of symptoms and signs of HF, mostly related to systemic congestion. In the presence of an underlying structural or functional cardiac dysfunction (whether chronic in ADHF or undiagnosed in de novo HF), one or more precipitating factors can induce AHF, although sometimes de novo HF can result directly from the onset of a new cardiac dysfunction, most frequently an acute coronary syndrome. Despite leading to similar clinical presentations, the underlying cardiac disease and precipitating factors may vary greatly and, therefore, the pathophysiology of AHF is highly heterogeneous. Left ventricular diastolic or systolic dysfunction results in increased preload and afterload, which in turn lead to pulmonary congestion. Fluid retention and redistribution result in systemic congestion, eventually causing organ dysfunction due to hypoperfusion. Current treatment of AHF is mostly symptomatic, centred on decongestive drugs, at best tailored according to the initial haemodynamic status with little regard to the underlying pathophysiological particularities. As a consequence, AHF is still associated with high mortality and hospital readmission rates. There is an unmet need for increased individualization of in-hospital management, including treatments targeting the causative factors, and continuation of treatment after hospital discharge to improve long-term outcomes.

Management of Acute Heart Failure during an Early Phase

Acute heart failure (AHF), a global pandemic with high morbidity and mortality, exerts a considerable economic burden. AHF includes a broad spectrum of clinical presentations ranging from new-onset heart failure to cardiogenic shock. Key elements of the management rely on the clinical diagnosis confirmed on, both, increased natriuretic peptides and echocardiography, and on the prompt initiation of oxygen therapy, including non-invasive positive pressure ventilation, vasodilators, and diuretics. A care pathway is essential, specifically when an acute coronary syndrome is suspected or in the case of cardiogenic shock. Association or increasing doses of vasopressors despite an adequate volume status are markers of progression toward a refractory cardiogenic shock state. For the latter, mechanical circulatory support should be initiated early, optimally before the onset of renal or liver failure. Thus, a tertiary care center is recommended for the management of patients with AHF who require percutaneous coronary intervention or mechanical circulatory support. This narrative review provides multidisciplinary guidance for the management of AHF and cardiogenic shock from pre-hospital to intensive care unit/cardiac care unit, based on contemporary evidence and expert opinion.

Right Ventricular Failure: Pathophysiology, Diagnosis and Treatment

The prognostic significance of the right ventricle (RV) has recently been recognised in several conditions, primarily those involving the left ventricle, the lungs and their vascular bed, or the right-sided chambers. Recent advances in imaging techniques have created new opportunities to study RV anatomy, physiology and pathophysiology, and contemporary research efforts have opened the doors to new treatment possibilities. Nevertheless, the treatment of RV failure remains challenging. Optimal management should consider the anatomical and physiological particularities of the RV and include appropriate imaging techniques to understand the underlying pathophysiological mechanisms. Treatment should include rapid optimisation of volume status, restoration of perfusion pressure and improvement of myocardial contractility and rhythm, and, in case of refractory RV failure, mechanical circulatory support.

The modern cardiovascular care unit: the cardiologist managing multiorgan dysfunction

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Despite many advances in the management of critically ill patients, cardiogenic shock remains a challenge because it is associated with high mortality. Even if there is no universally accepted definition of cardiogenic shock, end-perfusion organ dysfunction is an obligatory and major criterion of its definition.Organ dysfunction is an indicator that cardiogenic shock is already at an advanced stage and is undergoing a rapid self-aggravating evolution. The aim of the review is to highlight the importance to diagnose and to manage the organ dysfunction occurring in the cardiogenic shock patients by providing the best literature published this year.

RECENT FINDINGS

The first step is to diagnose the organ dysfunction and to assess their severity. Echo has an important and increasing place regarding the assessment of end-organ impairment whereas no new biomarker popped up.

SUMMARY

In this review, we aimed to highlight for intensivists and cardiologists managing cardiogenic shock, the recent advances in the care of end-organ dysfunctions associated with cardiogenic shock. The management of organ dysfunction is based on the improvement of the cardiac function by etiologic therapy, inotropes and assist devices but will often necessitate organ supports in hospitals with the right level of equipment and multidisciplinary expertise.

Nonischemic Causes of Cardiogenic Shock

Although cardiogenic shock is uncommon in the emergency department, it is associated with high mortality. Most cardiogenic shock is caused by ischemia, but nonischemic etiologies are essential to recognize. Clinicians should optimize preload, contractility, and afterload. Volume-responsive patients should be resuscitated in small aliquots, although some patients may require diuresis to improve cardiac output. Vasopressors are important to restore end-organ perfusion, and inotropes improve contractility. Intubation and positive pressure ventilation impact hemodynamics, which, depending on volume status, may be beneficial or deleterious. Knowing indications for mechanical circulatory support is important for timely consultation or transfer as indicated.

Levosimendan as rescue therapy in low output syndrome after cardiac surgery: effects and predictors of outcome

Objectives

Calcium sensitizers have been shown to improve outcomes in patients with low cardiac output syndrome (LCOS) after cardiac surgery. We assessed the effects of levosimendan on LCOS in cardiac surgical patients to identify outcome predictors.

Methods

A total of 106 patients in whom LCOS persisted despite conventional therapy additionally received 0.1 µg/kg/min of levosimendan for 24 hours according to a defined treatment algorithm. Baseline and treatment data as well as hemodynamic and outcome parameters were compared between survivors and nonsurvivors, and a multivariate correlation and regression tree analysis was implemented.

Results

The ejection fraction significantly increased from 27% ± 4% to 38% ± 8% within 24 hours and to 45% ± 10% within 48 hours of starting levosimendan. These changes were accompanied by a significant increase in cardiac output from 5.2 ± 0.6 to 6.2 ± 0.7 L/min within 24 hours and significant dose reductions in vasopressors and inotropes. In contrast to nonsurvivors, survivors’ need for inotropic support decreased after the addition of levosimendan to the therapy.

Conclusion

In our patients, all of whom were treated according to the same algorithm, the response to levosimendan in terms of the post-levosimendan need for inotropes and vasopressors predicted survival.

Acute Heart Failure Management

Acute heart failure (AHF) is a life-threatening medical condition, where urgent diagnostic and treatment methods are of key importance. However, there are few evidence-based treatment methods. Interestingly, despite relatively similar ways of management of AHF throughout the globe, mid-term outcome in East Asia, including South Korea is more favorable than in Europe. Yet, most of the treatment methods are symptomatic. The cornerstone of AHF management is identifying precipitating factors and specific phenotype. Multidisciplinary approach is important in AHF, which can be caused or aggravated by both cardiac and non-cardiac causes. The main pathophysiological mechanism in AHF is congestion, both systemic and inside the organs (lung, kidney, or liver). Cardiac output is often preserved in AHF except in a few cases of advanced heart failure. This paper provides guidance on AHF management in a time-based approach. Treatment strategies, criteria for triage, admission to hospital and discharge are described.

Cardiogenic shock complicating peripartum cardiomyopathy: Importance of early left ventricular unloading and bromocriptine therapy

INTRODUCTION

Acute peripartum cardiomyopathy complicated by cardiogenic shock is a rare but life-threatening disease. A prolactin fragment is considered causal for the pathogenesis of peripartum cardiomyopathy. This analysis sought to investigate the role of early percutaneous mechanical circulatory support with micro-axial flow-pumps and/or veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in combination with the prolactin inhibitor bromocriptine in refractory cardiogenic shock complicating peripartum cardiomyopathy.

METHODS AND RESULTS

In this single-centre analysis, five peripartum cardiomyopathy patients with refractory cardiogenic shock received mechanical circulatory support with either Impella CP microaxial pump only (n=2) or in combination with veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (n=3) in the setting of biventricular failure. All patients were mechanically ventilated. In all cases mechanical circulatory support was combined with bromocriptine therapy and early administration of levosimendan. All patients survived the acute phase of refractory cardiogenic shock. Mechanical circulatory support using a micro-axial pump allowed to significantly reduce catecholamine dosage. Remarkably, early left ventricular support with micro-axial flow-pumps resulted in myocardial recovery whereas delayed Impella (mechanical circulatory support) implantation was associated with poor left ventricular recovery.

CONCLUSION

Mechanical circulatory support in patients with refractory cardiogenic shock complicating peripartum cardiomyopathy was associated with a 30-day survival of 100% and a favourable outcome. Notably, early left ventricular unloading combined with bromocriptine therapy was associated with left ventricular recovery. Therefore, an immediate transfer to a tertiary hospital experienced in mechanical circulatory support in combination with bromocriptine treatment seems indispensable for successful treatment of peripartum cardiomyopathy complicated by cardiogenic shock.

Scandinavian SSAI clinical practice guideline on choice of inotropic agent for patients with acute circulatory failure

Background

Adult critically ill patients often suffer from acute circulatory failure and those with low cardiac output may be treated with inotropic agents. The aim of this Scandinavian Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine guideline was to present patient‐important treatment recommendations on this topic.

Methods

This guideline was developed according to GRADE. We assessed the following subpopulations of patients with shock: (1) shock in general, (2) septic shock, (3) cardiogenic shock, (4) hypovolemic shock, (5) shock after cardiac surgery, and (6) other types of shock, including vasodilatory shock. We assessed patient‐important outcome measures, including mortality and serious adverse reactions.

Results

For all patients, we suggest against the routine use of any inotropic agent, including dobutamine, as compared to placebo/no treatment (very low quality of evidence). For patients with shock in general, and in those with septic and other types of shock, we suggest using dobutamine rather than levosimendan or epinephrine (very low quality of evidence). For patients with cardiogenic shock and in those with shock after cardiac surgery, we suggest using dobutamine rather than milrinone (very low quality of evidence). For the other clinical questions, we refrained from giving any recommendations or suggestions.

Conclusions

We suggest against the routine use of any inotropic agent in adult patients with shock. If used, we suggest using dobutamine rather than other inotropic agents for the majority of patients, however, the quality of evidence was very low, implying high uncertainty on the balance between the benefits and harms of inotropic agents.

Optimising Heart Failure Therapies in the Acute Setting

Acute heart failure (AHF) is a life-threatening condition requiring immediate treatment. The initial therapy should take into account the clinical presentation, pathophysiology at play, precipitating factors and underlying cardiac pathology. Particular attention should be given to polymorbidity and the avoidance of potential iatrogenic harm. Patient preferences and ethical issues should be integrated into the treatment plan at an early stage. The average survival of AHF patients is 2 years and the most vulnerable period is the 3-month time window directly after discharge. Reducing both persistent subclinical congestion and underutilisation of disease-modifying heart failure therapies as well as ensuring optimal transitions of care after hospital discharge are essential in improving outcomes for AHF patients.

Management of acute heart failure in elderly patients

Acute heart failure (AHF) is the most common cause of unplanned hospital admissions, and is associated with high mortality rates. Over the next few decades, the combination of improved cardiovascular disease survival and progressive ageing of the population will further increase the prevalence of AHF in developed countries. New recommendations on the management of AHF have been published recently, but as elderly patients are under-represented in clinical trials, and scientific evidence is often lacking, the diagnosis and management of AHF in this population is challenging. The clinical presentation of AHF, especially in patients aged>85years, differs substantially from that in younger patients, with unspecific symptoms, such as fatigue and confusion, often overriding dyspnoea. Older patients also have a different risk profile compared with younger patients: often heart failure with preserved ejection fraction, and infection as the most frequent precipitating factor of AHF. Moreover, co-morbidities, disability and frailty are common, and increase morbidity, recovery time, readmission rates and mortality; their presence should be detected during a geriatric assessment. Diagnostics and treatment for AHF should be tailored according to cardiopulmonary and geriatric status, giving special attention to the patient's preferences for care. Whereas many elderly AHF patients may be managed similarly to younger patients, different strategies should be applied in the presence of relevant co-morbidities, disability and frailty. The option of palliative care should be considered at an early stage, to avoid unnecessary and harmful diagnostics and treatments.