Levosimendan vs. dobutamine: outcomes for acute heart failure patients on beta-blockers in SURVIVE

Dobutamine in the Management of Advanced Heart Failure

Background: The potential harm and clinical benefits of inotropic therapy in patients with decompensated heart failure with reduced ejection fraction or advanced heart failure were debated for three decades. Nonetheless, confronted with a dismal quality of life in the last months to years of life, continuous home inotropic therapy has recently gained traction for palliative therapy in patients who are not candidates for left ventricular mechanical circulatory support or heart transplantation. Methods: As continuous inotropic therapy is only considered for patients who experience symptomatic relief and display objective evidence of improvement, clinical equipoise is no longer present, and randomized controlled trials are hard to conduct. Results: We first outline the transient use of inotropic therapy in patients with decompensated heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and emphasize the hemodynamic requisite for inotropic therapy, which is a demonstration of a low cardiac output through a low mixed venous oxygen saturation. Lastly, we review the current experience with the use of home inotropic therapy in patients who are not candidates or are awaiting mechanical circulatory support or heart transplantation. Conclusions: Evidence-based clinical data are needed to guide inotropic therapy for refractory decompensated heart failure with reduced ejection fraction in patients who are ineligible or awaiting mechanical circulatory support or heart transplantation.

Perioperative Use of Levosimendan in Hepatic Transplantation With Diastolic Heart Failure: A Case Report

Levosimendan is a medication with a range of pharmacological effects, making it appropriate for use in several clinical settings, including advanced heart failure with pulmonary hypertension, cardiogenic shock, and acute heart failure. This case report details the perioperative management of a male in their 40s with a complex medical history, including primary hypoparathyroidism, cirrhosis, and severe pulmonary hypertension, who underwent urgent cadaveric donor liver transplantation. Information available on the perioperative use of levosimendan is still insufficient to be able to regulate behaviors that can guide its management on a regular basis.

Acute heart failure - an EFIM guideline critical appraisal and adaptation for internists

BACKGROUND

Over the past two decades, several studies have been conducted that have tried to answer questions on management of patients with acute heart failure (AHF) in terms of diagnosis and treatment. Updated international clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) have endorsed the findings of these studies. The aim of this document was to adapt recommendations of existing guidelines to help internists make decisions about specific and complex scenarios related to AHF.

METHODS

The adaptation procedure was to identify firstly unresolved clinical problems in patients with AHF in accordance with the PICO (Population, Intervention, Comparison and Outcomes) process, then conduct a critical assessment of existing CPGs and choose recommendations that are most applicable to these specific scenarios.

RESULTS

Seven PICOs were identified and CPGs were assessed. There is no single test that can help clinicians in discriminating patients with acute dyspnoea, congestion or hypoxaemia. Performing of echocardiography and natriuretic peptide evaluation is recommended, and chest X-ray and lung ultrasound may be considered. Treatment strategies to manage arterial hypotension and low cardiac output include short-term continuous intravenous inotropic support, vasopressors, renal replacement therapy, and temporary mechanical circulatory support. The most updated recommendations on how to treat specific patients with AHF and certain comorbidities and for reducing post-discharge rehospitalization and mortality are provided. Overall, 51 recommendations were endorsed and the rationale for the selection is provided in the main text.

CONCLUSION

Through the use of appropriate tailoring process methodology, this document provides a simple and updated guide for internists dealing with AHF patients.

Management of cardiogenic shock: a narrative review

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is characterized by low cardiac output and sustained tissue hypoperfusion that may result in end-organ dysfunction and death. CS is associated with high short-term mortality, and its management remains challenging despite recent advances in therapeutic options. Timely diagnosis and multidisciplinary team-based management have demonstrated favourable effects on outcomes. We aimed to review evidence-based practices for managing patients with ischemic and non-ischemic CS, detailing the multi-organ supports needed in this critically ill patient population.

Medical therapy of cardiogenic shock: Contemporary use of inotropes and vasopressors

Cardiogenic shock is a primary cardiac disorder that results in both clinical and biochemical evidence of tissue hypoperfusion and can lead to multi-organ failure and death depending on its severity. Inadequate cardiac contractility or cardiac power secondary to acute myocardial infarction remains the most frequent cause of cardiogenic shock, although its contribution has declined over the past two decades, compared with other causes. Despite some advances in cardiogenic shock management, this clinical syndrome is still burdened by an extremely high mortality. Its management is based on immediate stabilization of haemodynamic parameters so that further treatment, including mechanical circulatory support and transfer to specialized tertiary care centres, can be accomplished. With these aims, medical therapy, consisting mainly of inotropic drugs and vasopressors, still has a major role. The purpose of this article is to review current evidence on the use of these medications in patients with cardiogenic shock and discuss specific clinical settings with indications to their use.

Istaroxime for Patients with Acute Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Istaroxime, an intravenous inotropic agent with a dual mechanism-increasing both cardiomyocyte contractility and relaxation-is a novel treatment for acute heart failure (AHF), the leading cause of morbidity and mortality in heart failure. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis that synthesized randomized controlled trials (RCTs), which were retrieved by systematically searching PubMed, Web of Science, SCOPUS, and Cochrane until 24 April 2023. We used a fixed-effect or random-effect model-according to heterogeneity-to pool dichotomous data using the risk ratio (RR) and continuous data using the mean difference (MD), with a 95% confidence interval (CI). We included three RCTs with a total of 300 patients. Istaroxime was significantly associated with an increased left ventricular ejection fraction (mL) (MD: 1.06, 95% CI: 0.29, 1.82; p = 0.007), stroke volume index (MD: 3.04, 95% CI: 2.41, 3.67; p = 0.00001), and cardiac index (L/min/m2) (MD: 0.18, 95% CI: 0.11, 025; p = 0.00001). Also, istaroxime was significantly associated with a decreased E/A ratio (MD: -0.39, 95% CI: -0.58, -0.19; p = 0.0001) and pulmonary artery systolic pressure (mmHg) (MD: 2.30, 95% CI: 3.20, 1.40; p = 0.00001). Istaroxime was significantly associated with increased systolic blood pressure (mmHg) (MD: 5.32, 95% CI: 2.28, 8.37; p = 0.0006) and decreased heart rate (bpm) (MD: -3.05, 95% CI: -5.27, -0.82; p = 0.007). Since istaroxime improved hemodynamic and echocardiographic parameters, it constitutes a promising strategy for AHF management. However, the current literature is limited to a small number of RCTs, warranting further large-scale phase III trials before clinical endorsement.

Beta-blocker management in patients admitted for acute heart failure and reduced ejection fraction: a review and expert consensus opinion

The role of the beta-adrenergic signaling pathway in heart failure (HF) is pivotal. Early blockade of this pathway with beta-blocker (BB) therapy is recommended as the first-line medication for patients with HF and reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Conversely, in patients with severe acute HF (AHF), including those with resolved cardiogenic shock (CS), BB initiation can be hazardous. There are very few data on the management of BB in these situations. The present expert consensus aims to review all published data on the use of BB in patients with severe decompensated AHF, with or without hemodynamic compromise, and proposes an expert-recommended practical algorithm for the prescription and monitoring of BB therapy in critical settings.

Overview of the current use of levosimendan in France: a prospective observational cohort study

BACKGROUND

Following the results of randomized controlled trials on levosimendan, French health authorities requested an update of the current use and side-effects of this medication on a national scale.

METHOD

The France-LEVO registry was a prospective observational cohort study reflecting the indications, dosing regimens, and side-effects of levosimendan, as well as patient outcomes over a year.

RESULTS

The patients included (n = 602) represented 29.6% of the national yearly use of levosimendan in France. They were treated for cardiogenic shock (n = 250, 41.5%), decompensated heart failure (n = 127, 21.1%), cardiac surgery-related low cardiac output prophylaxis and/or treatment (n = 86, 14.3%), and weaning from veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (n = 82, 13.6%). They received 0.18 ± 0.07 µg/kg/min levosimendan over 26 ± 8 h. An initial bolus was administered in 45 patients (7.5%), 103 (17.1%) received repeated infusions, and 461 (76.6%) received inotropes and or vasoactive agents concomitantly. Hypotension was reported in 218 patients (36.2%), atrial fibrillation in 85 (14.1%), and serious adverse events in 17 (2.8%). 136 patients (22.6%) died in hospital, and 26 (4.3%) during the 90-day follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

We observed that levosimendan was used in accordance with recent recommendations by French physicians. Hypotension and atrial fibrillation remained the most frequent side-effects, while serious adverse event potentially attributable to levosimendan were infrequent. The results suggest that this medication was safe and potentially associated with some benefit in the population studied.

Early Recognition and Risk Stratification in Cardiogenic Shock: Well Begun Is Half Done

Cardiogenic shock is a complex syndrome manifesting with distinct phenotypes depending on the severity of the primary cardiac insult and the underlying status. As long as therapeutic interventions fail to divert its unopposed rapid evolution, poor outcomes will continue challenging health care systems. Thus, early recognition in the emergency setting is a priority, in order to avoid delays in appropriate management and to ensure immediate initial stabilization. Since advanced therapeutic strategies and specialized shock centers may provide beneficial support, it seems that directing patients towards the recently described shock network may improve survival rates. A multidisciplinary approach strategy commands the interconnections between the strategic role of the ED in affiliation with cardiac shock centers. This review outlines critical features of early recognition and initial therapeutic management, as well as the utility of diagnostic tools and risk stratification models regarding the facilitation of patient trajectories through the shock network. Further, it proposes the implementation of precise criteria for shock team activation and the establishment of definite exclusion criteria for streaming the right patient to the right place at the right time.

Pathophysiology-Based Management of Acute Heart Failure

Even though acute heart failure (AHF) is one of the most common admission diagnoses globally, its pathogenesis is poorly understood, and there are few effective treatments available. Despite an heterogenous onset, congestion is the leading contributor to hospitalization, making it a crucial therapeutic target. Complete decongestion, nevertheless, may be hard to achieve, especially in patients with reduced end organ perfusion. In order to promote a personalised pathophysiological-based therapy for patients with AHF, we will address in this review the pathophysiological principles that underlie the clinical symptoms of AHF as well as examine how to assess them in clinical practice, suggesting that gaining a deeper understanding of pathophysiology might result in significant improvements in HF therapy.

Levosimendan: mechanistic insight and its diverse future aspects in cardiac care

Inotropic agents are generally recommended to use in patients with acute decompensated heart failure (HF) with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) concurrent to end-organ dysfunction. However, due to certain pharmacological limitations like developing life threatening arrhythmia and tolerance, cannot be employed as much as needed. Meanwhile, Calcium ion (Ca²⁺) sensitisers exhibits their inotropic action by increasing the sensitivity of the cardiomyocyte to intracellular Ca²⁺ ion and have been reported as emerging therapeutic alternative in HF cases. Levosimendan (LEVO) is an inodilator and with its unique pharmacology justifying its use in a wide range of cardiac alterations in HF particularly in undergoing cardiac surgery. It is also reported to be better than classical inotropes in maintaining cardiac mechanical efficacy and reducing congestion in acute HF with hypotension. This review paper was designed to compile various evidence about basic pharmacology and potential clinical aspects of LEVO in cardiac surgery and other HF associated alterations. This will benefit directly to the researcher in initiating research and to fill the gaps in the area of thrust.

Heart Failure After Right Ventricular Myocardial Infarction

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Heart failure (HF) after right ventricular myocardial infarction (RVMI) is common and complicates its clinical course. This review aims to provide a current overview on the characteristic features of RV failure with focus on acute management.

RECENT FINDINGS

While HF after RVMI is classically seen after acute proximal right coronary artery occlusion, RV dysfunction may also occur after larger infarctions in the left coronary artery. Because of its different anatomy and physiology, the RV appears to be more resistant to permanent infarction compared to the LV with greater potential for recovery of ischemic myocardium. Hypotension and elevated jugular pressure in the presence of clear lung fields are hallmark signs of RV failure and should prompt confirmation by echocardiography. Management decisions are still mainly based on small studies and extrapolation of findings from LV failure. Early revascularization improves short- and long-term outcomes. Acute management should further focus on optimization of preload and afterload, maintenance of sufficient perfusion pressures, and prompt management of arrhythmias and concomitant LV failure, if present. In case of cardiogenic shock, use of vasopressors and/or inotropes should be considered along with timely use of mechanical circulatory support (MCS) in eligible patients. HF after RVMI is still a marker of worse outcome in acute coronary syndrome. Prompt revascularization, careful medical therapy with attention to the special physiology of the RV, and selected use of MCS provide the RV the time it needs to recover from the ischemic insult.

Efficacy of pharmacologic therapies in patients with acute heart failure: A network meta-analysis

Background: A network meta-analysis (NMA) of the current recommended drugs for the treatment of acute heart failure (AHF), was performed to compare the relative efficacy.

Methods: We used PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Clinical Trials Register, and Web of Science systems to search studies of randomized controlled trials (RCT) for the treatment of AHF recommended by the guidelines and expert consensus until 1 December 2020. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality within 30 days. The secondary outcomes included 30-days all-cause rehospitalization, rates of HF-related rehospitalization, rates of adverse events, and rates of serious adverse events. A Bayesian NMA based on random effects model was performed.

Results: After screening 14,888 citations, 23 RCTs (17,097 patients) were included, focusing on nesiritide, placebo, serelaxin, rhANP, omecamtiv mecarbil, tezosentan, KW-3902, conivaptan, tolvaptan, TRV027, chlorothiazide, metolazone, ularitide, relaxin, and rolofylline. Omecamtiv mecarbil had significantly lower all-cause mortality rates than the placebo (odds ratio 0.04, 0.01–0.22), rhANP (odds ratio 0.03, 0–0.40), serelaxin (odds ratio 0.05, 0.01–0.38), tezosentan (odds ratio 0.04, 0–0.22), tolvaptan (odds ratio 0.04, 0.01–0.30), and TRV027 (odds ratio 0.03, 0–0.36). No drug was superior to the other drugs for the secondary outcomes and safety outcomes.

Conclusion: No drug was superior to the other drugs for the secondary outcomes and safety outcomes. Current drugs for AHF show similar efficacy and safety.

The Coadministration of Levosimendan and Exenatide Offers a Significant Cardioprotective Effect to Isolated Rat Hearts against Ischemia/Reperfusion Injury

(1) Background: The present study aims to investigate the effect of administration of Levosimendan and Exenatide in various concentrations, as well as of the coadministration of those agents in an ischemia–reperfusion injury isolated heart model. (2) Methods: After 30 min of perfusion, the hearts underwent a 30 min period of regional ischemia followed by a 120 min period of reperfusion. All animals were randomly divided into 12 experimental groups of nine animals in each group: (1) Control, (2) Sham, (3) Digox (Negative control, Digoxin 1.67 μg/min), (4) Levo 1 (Levosimendan 0.01 μg/min), (5) Levo 2 (Levosimendan 0.03 μg/mL), (6) Levo 3 (Levosimendan 0.1 μg/min), (7) Levo 4 (Levosimendan 0.3 μg/min), (8) Levo 5 (Levosimendan 1 μg/min), (9) Exen 1 (Exenatide 0.001 μg/min), (10) Exen 2 (Exenatide 0.01 μg/min), (11) Exen 3 (Exenatide 0.1 μg/min) and (12) Combi (Levosimendan 0.1 µg/mL + Exenatide 0.001 μg/min). The hemodynamic parameters were recorded throughout the experiment. Arrhythmias and coronary flow were also evaluated. After every experiment the heart was suitably prepared and infarct size was measured. Markers of myocardial injury were also measured. Finally, oxidative stress was evaluated measuring reactive oxygen species. (3) Results: A dose-dependent improvement of the haemodynamic response was observed after the administration of both Levosimendan and Exenatide. The coadministration of both agents presented an even greater effect, improving the haemodynamic parameters further than the two agents separately. Levosimendan offered an increase of the coronary flow and both agents offered a reduction of arrhythmias. A dose-dependent reduction of the size of myocardial infarction and myocardial injury was observed after administration of Levosimendan and Exenatide. The coadministration of both agents offered a further improving the above parameters. Levosimendan also offered a significant reduction of oxidative stress. (4) Conclusions: The administration of Levosimendan and Exenatide offers a significant benefit by improving the haemodynamic response, increasing the coronary flow and reducing the occurrence of arrhythmias, the size of myocardial injury and myocardial oxidative stress in isolated rat hearts.

Predictive value of the APACHE II score in cardiogenic shock patients treated with a percutaneous left ventricular assist device

Background

The APACHE II score assesses patient prognosis in intensive care units. Different disease entities are predictable by using a specific factor called Diagnostic Category Weight (DCW). We aimed to validate the prognostic value of the APACHE II score in patients treated with a percutaneous left ventricular assist device because of refractory cardiogenic shock (CS).

Methods

From the Dresden Impella Registry, we analyzed 180 patients receiving an Impella CP®. The main outcome was the observed intrahospital mortality (S ^ ( t h o s p ) ), which was compared to the predicted mortality estimated by the APACHE II score.

Results

The APACHE II score, which was 33.5 ± 0.6, significantly overestimated intrahospital mortality (S ^ ( t h o s p ) 54.4 ± 3.7% vs. APACHE II 74.6 ± 1.6%; p < 0.001). Nevertheless, the APACHE II score showed an acceptable accuracy to predict intrahospital mortality (ROC AUC 0.70; 95% CI 0.62-0.78). Thus, we adapted the formula for calculation of predicted mortality by adjusting DCW. The total registry cohort was randomly divided into derivation group for calculation of adjusted DCW and validation group for testing. Intrahospital mortality was much more precisely predicted using the adjusted DCW compared to the conventional DCW (difference of predicted and observed mortality: -4.7 ± 2.4% vs. -23.2 ± 2.3%; p < 0.001). The new calculated DCW was -1.183 for the total cohort.

Conclusion

The APACHE II score has an acceptable accuracy for the prediction of intrahospital mortality but overestimates its total amount in CS patients. Adjustment of the DCW can lead to a much more precise prediction of prognosis.

The Use of Levosimendan for the Treatment of Heart Failure and its Potential Organoprotective Effects

The review article is aimed at providing a recent update on the use of levosimendan, an inotropic drug in current use for the treatment of heart failure. The review discusses its mechanisms of action, main hemodynamic effects, clinical trials and obtained evidences that have formed the basis of the current guidelines on its use, as well as the latest clinical and experimental trials evaluating its organ-protective effects. Conclusion: levosimendan has a promising potential for treating heart failure, prescribed even in low doses, and may be regarded as a drug with cerebroprotective and possible nephroprotective effects, requiring further large randomized clinical trials.

2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" replaces the "2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" and the "2017 ACC/AHA/HFSA Focused Update of the 2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure." The 2022 guideline is intended to provide patient-centric recommendations for clinicians to prevent, diagnose, and manage patients with heart failure.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2020 to December 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant clinical trials and research studies, published through September 2021, were also considered. This guideline was harmonized with other American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines published through December 2021. Structure: Heart failure remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. The 2022 heart failure guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with heart failure, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests. Many recommendations from the earlier heart failure guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data. Value statements are provided for certain treatments with high-quality published economic analyses.

2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure

AIM

The "2022 AHA/ACC/HFSA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" replaces the "2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure" and the "2017 ACC/AHA/HFSA Focused Update of the 2013 ACCF/AHA Guideline for the Management of Heart Failure." The 2022 guideline is intended to provide patient-centric recommendations for clinicians to prevent, diagnose, and manage patients with heart failure.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from May 2020 to December 2020, encompassing studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from MEDLINE (PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Collaboration, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other relevant databases. Additional relevant clinical trials and research studies, published through September 2021, were also considered. This guideline was harmonized with other American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology guidelines published through December 2021.

STRUCTURE

Heart failure remains a leading cause of morbidity and mortality globally. The 2022 heart failure guideline provides recommendations based on contemporary evidence for the treatment of these patients. The recommendations present an evidence-based approach to managing patients with heart failure, with the intent to improve quality of care and align with patients' interests. Many recommendations from the earlier heart failure guidelines have been updated with new evidence, and new recommendations have been created when supported by published data. Value statements are provided for certain treatments with high-quality published economic analyses.

Advanced heart failure: guideline-directed medical therapy, diuretics, inotropes, and palliative care

Heart failure (HF) is a major cause of mortality, hospitalizations, and reduced quality of life and a major burden for the healthcare system. The number of patients that progress to an advanced stage of HF is growing. Only a limited proportion of these patients can undergo heart transplantation or mechanical circulatory support. The purpose of this review is to summarize medical management of patients with advanced HF. First, evidence-based oral treatment must be implemented although it is often not tolerated. New therapeutic options may soon become possible for these patients. The second goal is to lessen the symptomatic burden through both decongestion and haemodynamic improvement. Some new treatments acting on cardiac function may fulfil both these needs. Inotropic agents acting through an increase in intracellular calcium have often increased risk of death. However, in the recent Global Approach to Lowering Adverse Cardiac Outcomes Through Improving Contractility in Heart Failure (GALACTIC-HF) trial, omecamtiv mecarbil was safe and effective in the reduction of the primary outcome of cardiovascular death or HF event compared with placebo (hazard ratio, 0.92; 95% confidence interval, 0.86-0.99; P = 0.03) and its effects were larger in those patients with more severe left ventricular dysfunction. Patients with severe HF who received omecamtiv mecarbil experienced a significant treatment benefit, whereas patients without severe HF did not (P = 0.005 for interaction). Lastly, clinicians should take care of the end of life with an appropriate multidisciplinary approach. Medical treatment of advanced HF therefore remains a major challenge and a wide open area for further research.

2021 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure: Developed by the Task Force for the diagnosis and treatment of acute and chronic heart failure of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC). With the special contribution of the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the ESC

Document Reviewers: Rudolf A. de Boer (CPG Review Coordinator) (Netherlands), P. Christian Schulze (CPG Review Coordinator) (Germany), Magdy Abdelhamid (Egypt), Victor Aboyans (France), Stamatis Adamopoulos (Greece), Stefan D. Anker (Germany), Elena Arbelo (Spain), Riccardo Asteggiano (Italy), Johann Bauersachs (Germany), Antoni Bayes-Genis (Spain), Michael A. Borger (Germany), Werner Budts (Belgium), Maja Cikes (Croatia), Kevin Damman (Netherlands), Victoria Delgado (Netherlands), Paul Dendale (Belgium), Polychronis Dilaveris (Greece), Heinz Drexel (Austria), Justin Ezekowitz (Canada), Volkmar Falk (Germany), Laurent Fauchier (France), Gerasimos Filippatos (Greece), Alan Fraser (United Kingdom), Norbert Frey (Germany), Chris P. Gale (United Kingdom), Finn Gustafsson (Denmark), Julie Harris (United Kingdom), Bernard Iung (France), Stefan Janssens (Belgium), Mariell Jessup (United States of America), Aleksandra Konradi (Russia), Dipak Kotecha (United Kingdom), Ekaterini Lambrinou (Cyprus), Patrizio Lancellotti (Belgium), Ulf Landmesser (Germany), Christophe Leclercq (France), Basil S. Lewis (Israel), Francisco Leyva (United Kingdom), AleVs Linhart (Czech Republic), Maja-Lisa Løchen (Norway), Lars H. Lund (Sweden), Donna Mancini (United States of America), Josep Masip (Spain), Davor Milicic (Croatia), Christian Mueller (Switzerland), Holger Nef (Germany), Jens-Cosedis Nielsen (Denmark), Lis Neubeck (United Kingdom), Michel Noutsias (Germany), Steffen E. Petersen (United Kingdom), Anna Sonia Petronio (Italy), Piotr Ponikowski (Poland), Eva Prescott (Denmark), Amina Rakisheva (Kazakhstan), Dimitrios J. Richter (Greece), Evgeny Schlyakhto (Russia), Petar Seferovic (Serbia), Michele Senni (Italy), Marta Sitges (Spain), Miguel Sousa-Uva (Portugal), Carlo G. Tocchetti (Italy), Rhian M. Touyz (United Kingdom), Carsten Tschoepe (Germany), Johannes Waltenberger (Germany/Switzerland) All experts involved in the development of these guidelines have submitted declarations of interest. These have been compiled in a report and published in a supplementary document simultaneously to the guidelines. The report is also available on the ESC website www.escardio.org/guidelines For the Supplementary Data which include background information and detailed discussion of the data that have provided the basis for the guidelines see European Heart Journal online.

Levosimendan in intensive care and emergency medicine: literature update and expert recommendations for optimal efficacy and safety

The inodilator levosimendan, in clinical use for over two decades, has been the subject of extensive clinical and experimental evaluation in various clinical settings beyond its principal indication in the management of acutely decompensated chronic heart failure. Critical care and emergency medicine applications for levosimendan have included postoperative settings, septic shock, and cardiogenic shock. As the experience in these areas continues to expand, an international task force of experts from 15 countries (Austria, Belgium, China, Croatia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, and the USA) reviewed and appraised the latest additions to the database of levosimendan use in critical care, considering all the clinical studies, meta-analyses, and guidelines published from September 2019 to November 2021. Overall, the authors of this opinion paper give levosimendan a "should be considered" recommendation in critical care and emergency medicine settings, with different levels of evidence in postoperative settings, septic shock, weaning from mechanical ventilation, weaning from veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, cardiogenic shock, and Takotsubo syndrome, in all cases when an inodilator is needed to restore acute severely reduced left or right ventricular ejection fraction and overall haemodynamic balance, and also in the presence of renal dysfunction/failure.

A Review of Inotropes and Inopressors for Effective Utilization in Patients With Acute Decompensated Heart Failure

ABSTRACT

Inotropes and inopressors are often first-line treatment in patients with cardiogenic shock. We summarize the pharmacology, indications, and contraindications of dobutamine, milrinone, dopamine, norepinephrine, epinephrine, and levosimendan. We also review the data on the use of these medications for acute decompensated heart failure and cardiogenic shock in this article.

Evidence and Current Use of Levosimendan in the Treatment of Heart Failure: Filling the Gap

Levosimendan is a distinctive inodilator combing calcium sensitization, phosphodiesterase inhibition and vasodilating properties through the opening of adenosine triphosphate-dependent potassium channels. It was first approved in Sweden in 2000 for the short-term treatment of acutely decompensated severe chronic heart failure when conventional therapy is not sufficient, and in cases where inotropic support is considered appropriate. After more than 20 years, clinical applications have considerably expanded across critical care and emergency medicine, and levosimendan is now under investigation in different cardiac settings (eg, septic shock, pulmonary hypertension) and for non-cardiac applications (eg, amyotrophic lateral sclerosis). This narrative review outlines key milestones in levosimendan history, by addressing regulatory issues, pharmacological peculiarities and clinical aspects (efficacy and safety) of a drug that did not receive great attention in the heart failure guidelines. A brief outlook to the ongoing clinical trials is also offered.

Effect of levosimendan on renal function in background of left ventricular dysfunction: a meta-analysis of randomized trials

OBJECTIVE

Levosimendan, an inotrope, is widely used in the management of heart failure (HF) and cardiac surgery, but it remains uncertain whether levosimendan can improve renal function in patients with left ventricular dysfunction (LVD).

METHODS

PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL from the inception to June 2020 were systematically screened for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) to investigate whether levosimendan offers kidney-related advantages in cardiovascular patients with LVD. We pooled the effects using a random-effect model.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight studies enrolling 5069 patients were included. Levosimendan reduced the sCr (SMD -0.28, 95% CI (-0.48, -0.09), P = 0.005, I² = 52.5%, high quality) and the risk of ARF (relative risk 0.75, 95%CI (0.60, 0.95), P = 0.017, I² = 11.3%, moderate-quality) in patients with LVD compared with control group. The reduction of sCr was more pronounced in patients with a relatively higher baseline sCr level. For secondary outcomes, levosimendan therapy was associated with the improvement of GFR (SMD 0.32, 95%CI (-0.05, 0.68), P = 0.092, I² = 55.1%, low-quality) and urine output (SMD 0.42, 95%CI (0.06, 0.79), P = 0.024, I² = 50.0%, very low-quality), but there was no significant reduction in BUN (SMD -0.14, 95%CI (-0.97, 0.70), P = 0.774, I² = 77.9%, very low-quality).

CONCLUSIONS

Levosimendan might improve renal function of patients with LVD.

[Levosimendan - a 20-Year Experience]

Levosimendan is a calcium sensitizer and opens adenosine triphosphate-dependent potassium channels. Since 20 years, it is approved for acute decompensated heart failure. It has been tested in many clinical trials for treatment of at-risk patients in cardiac surgery, right ventricular failure, pulmonary hypertension, weaning of extracorporeal systems, cardiogenic shock, septic shock, ARDS and others.Levosimendan has diverse positive effects next to positive inotropy. It improves ventriculoarterial coupling, increases peripheral perfusion, increases kidney glomerular filtration rate, coronary blood flow and it reduces preload and afterload as well as pulmonary capillary wedge pressure.Due to the opening of potassium channels, it also acts on mitochondria resulting in organ protection. Levosimendan acts anti-apoptotic. These positive effects were described in many small studies. Although this sounds like a promising drug for a variety of settings, results of several multicentre randomized placebo-controlled studies were frustrating. This review resumes some facts of levosimendan in different diseases.

An update on levosimendan in acute cardiac care: applications and recommendations for optimal efficacy and safety

Introduction: In the 20 years since its introduction to the palette of intravenous hemodynamic therapies, the inodilator levosimendan has established itself as a valuable asset for the management of acute decompensated heart failure. Its pharmacology is notable for delivering inotropy via calcium sensitization without an increase in myocardial oxygen consumption.Areas covered: Experience with levosimendan has led to its applications expanding into perioperative hemodynamic support and various critical care settings, as well as an array of situations associated with acutely decompensated heart failure, such as right ventricular failure, cardiogenic shock with multi-organ dysfunction, and cardio-renal syndrome. Evidence suggests that levosimendan may be preferable to milrinone for patients in cardiogenic shock after cardiac surgery or for weaning from extracorporeal life support and may be superior to dobutamine in terms of short-term survival, especially in patients on beta-blockers. Positive effects on kidney function have been noted, further differentiating levosimendan from catecholamines and phosphodiesterase inhibitors.Expert opinion:Levosimendan can be a valuable resource in the treatment of acute cardiac dysfunction, especially in the presence of beta-blockers or ischemic cardiomyopathy. When attention is given to avoiding or correcting hypovolemia and hypokalemia, an early use of the drug in the treatment algorithm is preferred.

Treatments targeting inotropy

Acute heart failure (HF) and in particular, cardiogenic shock are associated with high morbidity and mortality. A therapeutic dilemma is that the use of positive inotropic agents, such as catecholamines or phosphodiesterase-inhibitors, is associated with increased mortality. Newer drugs, such as levosimendan or omecamtiv mecarbil, target sarcomeres to improve systolic function putatively without elevating intracellular Ca2+. Although meta-analyses of smaller trials suggested that levosimendan is associated with a better outcome than dobutamine, larger comparative trials failed to confirm this observation. For omecamtiv mecarbil, Phase II clinical trials suggest a favourable haemodynamic profile in patients with acute and chronic HF, and a Phase III morbidity/mortality trial in patients with chronic HF has recently begun. Here, we review the pathophysiological basis of systolic dysfunction in patients with HF and the mechanisms through which different inotropic agents improve cardiac function. Since adenosine triphosphate and reactive oxygen species production in mitochondria are intimately linked to the processes of excitation-contraction coupling, we also discuss the impact of inotropic agents on mitochondrial bioenergetics and redox regulation. Therefore, this position paper should help identify novel targets for treatments that could not only safely improve systolic and diastolic function acutely, but potentially also myocardial structure and function over a longer-term.

Levosimendan and Global Longitudinal Strain Assessment in Sepsis (GLASSES 1): a study protocol for an observational study

INTRODUCTION

Cardiogenic shock is a condition of low cardiac output that represents the end stage of a progressive deterioration of cardiac function. The main cause is ischaemic heart disease, but there are several non-ischaemic causes, including sepsis. The use of levosimendan in cardiogenic shock during sepsis is still under debate.

METHODS

We are conducting an observational, single-centre, not-for-profit study enrolling patients aged 18-80 years old admitted to the intensive care unit with a diagnosis of septic shock. Patients will be monitored with the EV1000/VolumeView device (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, USA). Patients with cardiac index (CI) values <2.5 L/min/m² and/or stroke volume index (SVI) <30 mL/beat/m² are considered eligible for the study. Enrolled participants will undergo an echocardiographic examination using the Vivid S6 ultrasound machine (General Electric, Northville, Michigan) and a 3.6 MHz cardiology probe through which the apical projections of chambers 2, 3 and 4 will be acquired; this is necessary to calculate the global longitudinal strain (GLS) using EchoPAC* Clinical Workstation Software (General Electric). A dobutamine infusion will be started in these patients; 24 hours later CI and SVI will be recalculated using EV1000/VolumeView and then a levosimendan infusion will begin for 24 hours. Once the infusion cycle of the calcium-sensitising drug has been carried out, the infusion of dobutamine will be reduced until it stops, and the CI, SVI, GLS and arterial elastance (Ea):Ventricular Elastance (Ees) will be re-evaluated. The primary endpoint is recovery of GLS ≥15% and the secondary endpoint is a relative reduction in mortality of 15%.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The investigators declare that the study will be conducted in full compliance with international regulations (EU Directive 2016/679/EC) and national implementation (DM 15 July 1997; 211/2003; 200/2007) regarding the clinical trial and the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. Study results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals and conferences. Ethical approval for this study has been given by Comitato Etico Regione Toscana - Area Vasta Centro, Florence, Italy (ethical committee number: 13875_oss) on 25 May 2019 (Chairperson Professor Marco Marchi).

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT04141410.

Potential of the Cardiovascular Drug Levosimendan in the Management of Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis: An Overview of a Working Hypothesis

Levosimendan is a calcium sensitizer that promotes myocyte contractility through its calcium-dependent interaction with cardiac troponin C. Administered intravenously, it has been used for nearly 2 decades to treat acute and advanced heart failure and to support the heart function in various therapy settings characterized by low cardiac output. Effects of levosimendan on noncardiac muscle suggest a possible new application in the treatment of people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), a neuromuscular disorder characterized by progressive weakness, and eventual paralysis. Previous attempts to improve the muscle response in ALS patients and thereby maintain respiratory function and delay progression of disability have produced some mixed results. Continuing this line of investigation, levosimendan has been shown to enhance in vitro the contractility of the diaphragm muscle fibers of non-ALS patients and to improve in vivo diaphragm neuromuscular efficiency in healthy subjects. Possible positive effects on respiratory function in people with ALS were seen in an exploratory phase 2 study, and a phase 3 clinical trial is now underway to evaluate the potential benefit of an oral form of levosimendan on both respiratory and overall functions in patients with ALS. Here, we will review the various known pharmacologic effects of levosimendan, considering their relevance to people living with ALS.

Levosimendan Efficacy and Safety: 20 years of SIMDAX in Clinical Use

Levosimendan was first approved for clinic use in 2000, when authorisation was granted by Swedish regulatory authorities for the haemodynamic stabilisation of patients with acutely decompensated chronic heart failure. In the ensuing 20 years, this distinctive inodilator, which enhances cardiac contractility through calcium sensitisation and promotes vasodilatation through the opening of adenosine triphosphate-dependent potassium channels on vascular smooth muscle cells, has been approved in more than 60 jurisdictions, including most of the countries of the European Union and Latin America. Areas of clinical application have expanded considerably and now include cardiogenic shock, takotsubo cardiomyopathy, advanced heart failure, right ventricular failure and pulmonary hypertension, cardiac surgery, critical care and emergency medicine. Levosimendan is currently in active clinical evaluation in the US. Levosimendan in IV formulation is being used as a research tool in the exploration of a wide range of cardiac and non-cardiac disease states. A levosimendan oral form is at present under evaluation in the management of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. To mark the 20 years since the advent of levosimendan in clinical use, 51 experts from 23 European countries (Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, UK and Ukraine) contributed to this essay, which evaluates one of the relatively few drugs to have been successfully introduced into the acute heart failure arena in recent times and charts a possible development trajectory for the next 20 years.

A review of the management of patients with advanced heart failure in the intensive care unit

Despite progress in the medical and device therapy for heart failure (HF), the prognosis for those with advanced HF remains poor. Acute heart failure (AcHF) is the rapid development of, or worsening of symptoms and signs of HF typically leading to hospitalization. Whilst many HF decompensations are managed at a ward-based level, a proportion of patients require higher acuity care in the intensive care unit (ICU). Admission to ICU is associated with a higher risk of in-hospital mortality, and in those who fail to respond to standard supportive and medical therapy, a proportion maybe suitable for mechanical circulatory support (MCS). The optimal pre-operative management of advanced HF patients awaiting durable MCS or cardiac transplantation (CTx) is vital in improving both short and longer-term outcomes. This review will summarize the clinical assessment, hemodynamic profiling and management of the patient with AcHF in the ICU. The general principles of pre-surgical optimization encompassing individual systems (the kidneys, the liver, blood and glycemic control) will be discussed. Other factors impacting upon post-operative outcomes including nutrition and sarcopenia and pre-surgical skin decolonization have been included. Issues specific to durable MCS including the assessment of the right ventricle and strategies for optimization will also be discussed.

Levosimendan Efficacy and Safety: 20 Years of SIMDAX in Clinical Use

Levosimendan was first approved for clinical use in 2000, when authorization was granted by Swedish regulatory authorities for the hemodynamic stabilization of patients with acutely decompensated chronic heart failure (HF). In the ensuing 20 years, this distinctive inodilator, which enhances cardiac contractility through calcium sensitization and promotes vasodilatation through the opening of adenosine triphosphate-dependent potassium channels on vascular smooth muscle cells, has been approved in more than 60 jurisdictions, including most of the countries of the European Union and Latin America. Areas of clinical application have expanded considerably and now include cardiogenic shock, takotsubo cardiomyopathy, advanced HF, right ventricular failure, pulmonary hypertension, cardiac surgery, critical care, and emergency medicine. Levosimendan is currently in active clinical evaluation in the United States. Levosimendan in IV formulation is being used as a research tool in the exploration of a wide range of cardiac and noncardiac disease states. A levosimendan oral form is at present under evaluation in the management of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. To mark the 20 years since the advent of levosimendan in clinical use, 51 experts from 23 European countries (Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom, and Ukraine) contributed to this essay, which evaluates one of the relatively few drugs to have been successfully introduced into the acute HF arena in recent times and charts a possible development trajectory for the next 20 years.

Use of Levosimendan in Intensive Care Unit Settings: An Opinion Paper

Levosimendan is an inodilator that promotes cardiac contractility primarily through calcium sensitization of cardiac troponin C and vasodilatation via opening of adenosine triphosphate–sensitive potassium (K_ATP) channels in vascular smooth muscle cells; the drug also exerts organ-protective effects through a similar effect on mitochondrial K_ATP channels. This pharmacological profile identifies levosimendan as a drug that may have applications in a wide range of critical illness situations encountered in intensive care unit medicine: hemodynamic support in cardiogenic or septic shock; weaning from mechanical ventilation or from extracorporeal membrane oxygenation; and in the context of cardiorenal syndrome. This review, authored by experts from 9 European countries (Austria, Belgium, Czech republic, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, Sweden, and Switzerland), examines the clinical and experimental data for levosimendan in these situations and concludes that, in most instances, the evidence is encouraging, which is not the case with other cardioactive and vasoactive drugs routinely used in the intensive care unit. The size of the available studies is, however, limited and the data are in need of verification in larger controlled trials. Some proposals are offered for the aims and designs of these additional studies.

Levosimendan in the light of the results of the recent randomized controlled trials: an expert opinion paper

Despite interesting and unique pharmacological properties, levosimendan has not proven a clear superiority to placebo in the patient populations that have been enrolled in the various recent multicenter randomized controlled trials. However, the pharmacodynamic effects of levosimendan are still considered potentially very useful in a number of specific situations.Patients with decompensated heart failure requiring inotropic support and receiving beta-blockers represent the most widely accepted indication. Repeated infusions of levosimendan are increasingly used to facilitate weaning from dobutamine and avoid prolonged hospitalizations in patients with end-stage heart failure, awaiting heart transplantation or left ventricular assist device implantation. New trials are under way to confirm or refute the potential usefulness of levosimendan to facilitate weaning from veno-arterial ECMO, to treat cardiogenic shock due to left or right ventricular failure because the current evidence is mostly retrospective and requires confirmation with better-designed studies. Takotsubo syndrome may represent an ideal target for this non-adrenergic inotrope, but this statement also relies on expert opinion. There is no benefit from levosimendan in patients with septic shock. The two large trials evaluating the prophylactic administration of levosimendan (pharmacological preconditioning) in cardiac surgical patients with poor left ventricular ejection fraction could not show a significant reduction in their composite endpoints reflecting low cardiac output syndrome with respect to placebo. However, the subgroup of those who underwent isolated CABG appeared to have a reduction in mortality. A new study will be required to confirm this exploratory finding.Levosimendan remains a potentially useful inodilator agent in a number of specific situations due to its unique pharmacological properties. More studies are needed to provide a higher level of proof regarding these indications.

Short-Term Therapies for Treatment of Acute and Advanced Heart Failure-Why so Few Drugs Available in Clinical Use, Why Even Fewer in the Pipeline?

Both acute and advanced heart failure are an increasing threat in term of survival, quality of life and socio-economical burdens. Paradoxically, the use of successful treatments for chronic heart failure can prolong life but-per definition-causes the rise in age of patients experiencing acute decompensations, since nothing at the moment helps avoiding an acute or final stage in the elderly population. To complicate the picture, acute heart failure syndromes are a collection of symptoms, signs and markers, with different aetiologies and different courses, also due to overlapping morbidities and to the plethora of chronic medications. The palette of cardio- and vasoactive drugs used in the hospitalization phase to stabilize the patient's hemodynamic is scarce and even scarcer is the evidence for the agents commonly used in the practice (e.g. catecholamines). The pipeline in this field is poor and the clinical development chronically unsuccessful. Recent set backs in expected clinical trials for new agents in acute heart failure (AHF) (omecamtiv, serelaxine, ularitide) left a field desolately empty, where only few drugs have been approved for clinical use, for example, levosimendan and nesiritide. In this consensus opinion paper, experts from 26 European countries (Austria, Belgium, Croatia, Cyprus, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Israel, Italy, The Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Russia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, U.K. and Ukraine) analyse the situation in details also by help of artificial intelligence applied to bibliographic searches, try to distil some lesson-learned to avoid that future projects would make the same mistakes as in the past and recommend how to lead a successful development project in this field in dire need of new agents.

Adrenergic Downregulation in Critical Care: Molecular Mechanisms and Therapeutic Evidence

Catecholamines remain the mainstay of therapy for acute cardiovascular dysfunction. However, adrenergic receptors quickly undergo desensitization and downregulation after prolonged stimulation. Moreover, prolonged exposure to high circulating catecholamines levels is associated with several adverse effects on different organ systems. Unfortunately, in critically ill patients, adrenergic downregulation translates into progressive reduction of cardiovascular response to exogenous catecholamine administration, leading to refractory shock. Accordingly, there has been a growing interest in recent years toward use of noncatecholaminergic inotropes and vasopressors. Several studies investigating a wide variety of catecholamine-sparing strategies (eg, levosimendan, vasopressin, β-blockers, steroids, and use of mechanical circulatory support) have been published recently. Use of these agents was associated with improvement in hemodynamics and decreased catecholamine use but without a clear beneficial effect on major clinical outcomes. Accordingly, additional research is needed to define the optimal management of catecholamine-resistant shock.

Effects of Levosimendan on Inflammation and Oxidative Stress Pathways in a Lipopolysaccharide-Stimulated Human Endothelial Cell Model

Levosimendan is a myocardial Ca²⁺ sensitizer and opener of ATP-dependent potassium channels with inotropic, vasodilating, and cardioprotective properties. It was originally developed for the treatment of acute decompensated heart failure, but its complex mechanism of action means that it could also play a role in organ protection in response to infection. Using an in vitro approach, we explored whether levosimendan administration influenced cell responses to lipopolysaccharide (LPS). Primary human umbilical vein endothelial cells were stimulated with 1 µg/ml LPS from Escherichia coli (E. coli). Cells were treated with levosimendan at 0, 0.1, 1, or 10 µM 3 hr later. Samples were taken 24 hr after treatment to measure cell necrosis, apoptosis, pro-inflammatory mediators (interleukin 6 [IL-6] and toll-like receptor 4 [TLR4]), and oxidative stress (total reactive oxygen species/reactive nitrogen species [ROS/RNS]). Levosimendan at 1 and 10 µM protected against LPS-induced endothelial cell death and reduced TLR4 expression (p < .05). All doses reduced levels of IL-6 and ROS/RNS (p < .05). Findings suggest that levosimendan may exert protective effects against endothelial cell death in this model via attenuation of inflammation and oxidative stress pathways. Future studies might explore the potential beneficial role of levosimendan in modulating molecular mechanisms triggered by infections.

Levosimendan in Acute and Advanced Heart Failure: an Expert Perspective on Posology and Therapeutic Application

Levosimendan, a calcium sensitizer and potassium channel-opener, is widely appreciated by many specialist heart failure practitioners for its effects on systemic and pulmonary hemodynamics and for the relief of symptoms of acute heart failure. The drug’s impact on mortality in large randomized controlled trials has been inconsistent or inconclusive but, in contrast to conventional inotropes, there have been no indications of worsened survival and some signals of improved heart failure-related quality of life. For this reason, levosimendan has been proposed as a safer inodilator option than traditional agents in settings, such as advanced heart failure. Positive effects of levosimendan on renal function have also been described. At the HEART FAILURE 2018 congress of the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology, safe and effective use levosimendan in acute and advanced heart failure was examined in a series of expert tutorials. The proceedings of those tutorials are summarized in this review, with special reference to advanced heart failure and heart failure with concomitant renal dysfunction. Meta-analysis of clinical trials data is supportive of a renal-protective effect of levosimendan, while physiological observations suggest that this effect is exerted at least in part via organ-specific effects that may include selective vasodilation of glomerular afferent arterioles and increased renal blood flow, with no compromise of renal oxygenation. These lines of evidence require further investigation and their clinical significance needs to be evaluated in specifically designed prospective trials.