Contemporary Management of Acute Decompensated Heart Failure and Cardiogenic Shock

Evaluating the role of ivabradine in acute decompensated heart failure: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) presents a significant global health challenge, with high morbidity, mortality, and healthcare costs. The current therapeutic options for ADHF are limited. Ivabradine, a selective inhibitor of hyperpolarization-activated cyclic nucleotide-gated (HCN) channels, has emerged as a potential therapy for ADHF by reducing the heart rate (HR) without negatively affecting myocardial contractility. However, the evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of ivabradine in patients with ADHF is limited and inconsistent. This meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of ivabradine for ADHF based on observational studies.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was conducted following PRISMA guidelines to identify relevant observational studies comparing ivabradine with placebo in adult patients with ADHF. Data were pooled using a random-effects model, and heterogeneity was assessed. The risk of bias was evaluated using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale.

RESULTS

Four observational studies comprising a total of 12034 patients. Meta-analysis revealed that ivabradine significantly reduced all-cause mortality (RR: 0.66, 95 % CI: 0.49-0.89, p < 0.01) and resting HR (MD: -12.54, 95 % CI: -21.66-3.42, p < 0.01) compared to placebo. However, no significant differences were observed in cardiovascular mortality, hospital readmission for all causes, changes in LVEF, or changes in LVEDD. Sensitivity and publication bias assessments were conducted for each outcome.

CONCLUSION

Ivabradine may be beneficial for reducing mortality and HR in patients with ADHF. However, its impact on other clinical outcomes such as cardiovascular mortality, hospital readmission, and cardiac function remains inconclusive. Further research, particularly well-designed RCTs with larger sample sizes and longer follow-up durations, are warranted.

Inotrope Use and Intensive Care Unit Mortality in Patients With Cardiogenic Shock: An Analysis of a Large Electronic Intensive Care Unit Database

Purpose: To determine whether inotrope administration is associated with increased all-cause mortality in cardiogenic shock (CS) patients and to identify inotropes superior for improving mortality.

Methods: This retrospective cohort study analyzed data retrieved from the Philips Electronic ICU (eICU) database, a clinical database of 200,859 patients from over 208 hospitals located throughout the United States. The database was searched for patients admitted with CS to the intensive care unit (ICU) between 2014 and 2015. We evaluated 34,381 CS patients. They were classified into the inotrope and non-inotrope groups based on whether inotropes were administered during hospitalization. The primary endpoint was all-cause hospital mortality.

Findings: In total, 15,021 (43.69%) patients received inotropes during hospitalization. The in-hospital mortality rate was significantly higher in the inotrope group than in the non-inotrope group (2,999 [24.03%] vs. 1,547 [12.40%], adjusted hazard ratio: 2.24; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 2.09–2.39; p < 0.0001). After propensity score matching according to the cardiac index, 359 patients were included in each group. The risk of ICU (OR 5.65, 95% CI, 3.17–10.08, p < 0.001) and hospital (OR 2.63, 95% CI: 1.75–3.95, p < 0.001) mortality in the inotrope group was significantly higher. In the inotrope group, the administration of norepinephrine ≤0.1 μg/kg/min and dopamine ≤15 μg/kg/min did not increase the risk of hospital mortality, and milrinone administration was associated with a lower mortality risk (odds ratio: 0.559, 95% CI: 0.430–0.727, p < 0.001). Meanwhile, the administration of >0.1 μg/kg/min dobutamine, epinephrine, and norepinephrine and dopamine >15 μg/kg/min was associated with a higher risk of hospital mortality.

Conclusions: Inotropes should be used cautiously because they may be associated with a higher risk of mortality in CS patients. Low-dose norepinephrine and milrinone may associated with lower risk of hospital mortality in these patients, and supportive therapies should be considered when high-dose inotropes are administered.