Hemodynamic improvement following levosimendan treatment in patients with acute myocardial infarction and cardiogenic shock*

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.

Vasoactive pharmacologic therapy in cardiogenic shock: a critical review

Background

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is an acute complex condition leading to morbidity and mortality. Vasoactive medications, such as vasopressors and inotropes are considered the cornerstone of pharmacological treatment of CS to improve end-organ perfusion by increasing cardiac output (CO) and blood pressure (BP), thus preventing multiorgan failure.

Objective

A critical review was conducted to analyze the currently available randomized studies of vasoactive agents in CS to determine the indications of each agent and to critically appraise the methodological quality of the studies.

Methods

PubMed database search was conducted to identify randomized controlled trials (RCTs) on vasoactive therapy in CS. After study selection, the internal validity of the selected studies was critically appraised using the three-item Jadad scale.

Results

Nine studies randomized 2388 patients with a mean age ranged between 62 and 69 years, were identified. Seven of studies investigated CS in the setting of acute myocardial infarction (AMI). The studies evaluated the comparisons of norepinephrine (NE) vs. dopamine, epinephrine vs. NE, levosimendan vs. dobutamine, enoximone or placebo, and nitric oxide synthase inhibitors (NOSi) vs. placebo. The mean Jadad score of the nine studies was 3.33, with only three studies of a score of 5.

Conclusions

The evidence from the studies of vasoactive agents in CS carries uncertainties. The methodological quality between the studies is variable due to the inherent difficulties to conduct a study in CS. Vasopressors and inotropes continue to have a fundamental role given the lack of pharmacological alternatives.

Current and emerging drug targets in heart failure treatment

After initial strategies targeting inotropism and congestion, the neurohormonal interpretative model of heart failure (HF) pathophysiology has set the basis for current pharmacological management of HF, as most of guideline recommended drug classes, including beta-blockers, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin receptor blockers, and mineralocorticoid receptor antagonists, blunt the activation of detrimental neurohormonal axes, namely sympathetic and renin–angiotensin–aldosterone (RAAS) systems. More recently, sacubitril/valsartan, a first-in-class angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor, combining inhibition of RAAS and potentiation of the counter-regulatory natriuretic peptide system, has been consistently demonstrated to reduce mortality and HF-related hospitalization. A number of novel pharmacological approaches have been tested during the latest years, leading to mixed results. Among them, drugs acting directly at a second messenger level, such as the soluble guanylate cyclase stimulator vericiguat, or other addressing myocardial energetics and mitochondrial function, such as elamipretide or omecamtiv-mecarbil, will likely change the therapeutic management of patients with HF. Sodium glucose cotransporter 2 inhibitors, initially designed for the management of type 2 diabetes mellitus, have been recently demonstrated to improve outcome in HF, although mechanisms of their action on cardiovascular system are yet to be elucidated. Most of these emerging approaches have shifted the therapeutic target from neurohormonal systems to the heart, by improving cardiac contractility, metabolism, fibrosis, inflammation, and remodeling. In the present paper, we review from a pathophysiological perspective current and novel therapeutic strategies in chronic HF.

Cardiogenic shock and acute kidney injury: the rule rather than the exception

Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a life-threatening condition of poor end-organ perfusion, caused by any cardiovascular disease resulting in a severe depression of cardiac output. Despite recent advances in replacement therapies, the outcome of CS is still poor, and its management depends more on empirical decisions rather than on evidence-based strategies. By its side, acute kidney injury (AKI) is a frequent complication of CS, resulting in the onset of a cardiorenal syndrome. The combination of CS with AKI depicts a worse clinical scenario and holds a worse prognosis. Many factors can lead to acute renal impairment in the setting of CS, either for natural disease progression or for iatrogenic causes. This review aims at collecting the current evidence-based acknowledgments in epidemiology, pathophysiology, clinical features, diagnosis, and management of CS with AKI. We also attempted to highlight the major gaps in evidence as well as to point out possible strategies to improve the outcome.

Short-term treatments for acute cardiac care: inotropes and inodilators

Acute heart failure (AHF) continues to be a substantial cause of illness and death, with in-hospital and 3-month mortality rates of 5% and 10%, respectively, and 6-month re-admission rates in excess of 50% in a range of clinical trials and registry studies; the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Heart Failure Long-Term Registry recorded a 1-year death or rehospitalization rate of 36%. As regards the short-term treatment of AHF patients, evidence was collected in the ESC Heart Failure Long-Term Registry that intravenous (i.v.) treatments are administered heterogeneously in the critical phase, with limited reference to guideline recommendations. Moreover, recent decades have been characterized by a prolonged lack of successful innovation in this field, with a plethora of clinical trials generating neutral or inconclusive findings on long-term mortality effects from a multiplicity of short-term interventions in AHF. One of the few exceptions has been the calcium sensitizer and inodilator levosimendan, introduced 20 years ago for the treatment of acutely decompensated chronic heart failure. In the present review, we will focus on the utility of this agent in the wider context of i.v. inotropic and inodilating therapies for AHF and related pathologies.

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.

Primary graft dysfunction after heart transplantation: a thorn amongst the roses

Primary graft dysfunction (PGD) remains the leading cause of early mortality post-heart transplantation. Despite improvements in mechanical circulatory support and critical care measures, the rate of PGD remains significant. A recent consensus statement by the International Society of Heart and Lung Transplantation (ISHLT) has formulated a definition for PGD. Five years on, we look at current concepts and future directions of PGD in the current era of transplantation.

Shock - Classification and Pathophysiological Principles of Therapeutics

The management of patients with shock is extremely challenging because of the myriad of possible clinical presentations in cardiogenic shock, septic shock and hypovolemic shock and the limitations of contemporary therapeutic options. The treatment of shock includes the administration of endogenous catecholamines (epinephrine, norepinephrine, and dopamine) as well as various vasopressor agents that have shown efficacy in the treatment of the various types of shock. In addition to the endogenous catecholamines, dobutamine, isoproterenol, phenylephrine, and milrinone have served as the mainstays of shock therapy for several decades. Recently, experimental studies have suggested that newer agents such as vasopressin, selepressin, calcium-sensitizing agents like levosimendan, cardiac-specific myosin activators like omecamtiv mecarbil (OM), istaroxime, and natriuretic peptides like nesiritide can enhance shock therapy, especially when shock presents a more complex clinical picture than normal. However, their ability to improve clinical outcomes remains to be proven. It is the purpose of this review to describe the mechanism of action, dosage requirements, advantages and disadvantages, and specific indications and contraindications for the use of each of these catecholamines and vasopressors, as well as to elucidate the most important clinical trials that serve as the basis of contemporary shock therapy.

Impact of levosimendan on weaning from peripheral venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation in intensive care unit

BACKGROUND

Few data are available on the impact of levosimendan in refractory cardiogenic shock patients undergoing peripheral venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO). The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of levosimendan on VA-ECMO weaning in patients hospitalized in intensive care unit (ICU).

METHODS

This retrospective cohort study was conducted in a French university hospital from 2010 to 2017. All patients hospitalized in ICU undergoing VA-ECMO were consecutively evaluated.

RESULTS

A total of 150 patients undergoing VA-ECMO were eligible for the study. Thirty-eight propensity-matched patients were evaluated in the levosimendan group and 65 in the non-levosimendan group. In patients treated with levosimendan, left ventricular ejection fraction had increased from 21.5 ± 9.1% to 30.7 ± 13.5% (P < 0.0001) and aortic velocity-time integral from 8.9 ± 4 cm to 12.5 ± 3.8 cm (P = 0.002) 24 h after drug infusion. After propensity score matching, levosimendan was the only factor associated with a significant reduction in VA-ECMO weaning failure rates (hazard ratio = 0.16; 95% confidence interval 0.04-0.7; P = 0.01). Kaplan-Meier survival curves showed that survival rates at 30 days were 78.4% for the levosimendan group and 49.5% for the non-levosimendan group (P = 0.02). After propensity score matching analysis, the difference in 30-day mortality between the two groups was not significant (hazard ratio = 0.55; 95% confidence interval 0.27-1.10; P = 0.09).

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that levosimendan was associated with a beneficial effect on VA-ECMO weaning in ICU patients.

Effects of Levosimendan on Patients with Heart Failure Complicating Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

BACKGROUND

The prognosis for patients with heart failure (HF), including cardiogenic shock (CS), complicating acute coronary syndrome (ACS) remains poor.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to review the relevant literature and evaluate whether levosimendan was associated with better clinical outcomes in these patients.

METHODS

We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library databases for randomized controlled trials that investigated levosimendan compared with any control in patients with HF/CS complicating ACS.

RESULTS

A total of 1065 patients from nine trials were included in this study. Analysis showed that levosimendan significantly reduced total mortality and the incidence of worsening HF. In patients with HF-ACS, levosimendan was associated with reduced mortality. In patients with CS-ACS, no significant difference was observed between the two groups. Levosimendan contributed to significantly reduced mortality when compared with placebo, but no significant reduction was seen compared with dobutamine. Compared with controls, levosimendan decreased pulmonary capillary wedge pressure and systemic vascular resistance and increased cardiac index, with no significant difference observed between the groups in terms of heart rate. Levosimendan non-significantly increased the risk of hypotension but did not increase the risk of ischemic episodes, sinus tachycardia, atrial fibrillation, or ventricular arrhythmias.

CONCLUSION

Levosimendan appears to be a promising drug to reduce mortality and worsening HF in patients with HF/CS-ACS. It appears to provide hemodynamic benefit and was associated with an increased risk of hypotension.

The inodilator levosimendan as a treatment for acute heart failure in various settings

Levosimendan is an inodilator developed for treatment of acute heart failure. It was shown to enhance cardiac contractility, and to exert a vasodilatory effect in all vascular beds. In some trials, the use of levosimendan was associated with cardioprotective effects. These distinctive qualities may be relevant to its use in a range of acute heart failure settings and/or complications, including acute coronary syndromes and cardiogenic shock. It is conjectured that part of the benefit of levosimendan may arise from restoration of ventriculo-arterial coupling via optimization of the ratio of arterial to ventricular elastance and the transfer of mechanical energy. Full confirmation of the effectiveness of levosimendan is still awaited in many of these scenarios; however, the range of potential applications highlights both the versatility of levosimendan and the relative lack of proven interventions in many of these situations.

Comparison of levosimendan and nitroglycerine in patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery

Background:

Levosimendan a calcium ion sensitizer improves both systolic and diastolic functions. This novel lusitropic drug has predictable antiischemic properties which are mediated via the opening of mitochondrial adenosine triphosphate-sensitive potassium channels. This action of levosimendan is beneficial in cardiac surgical patients as it improves myocardial contractility, decreases systemic vascular resistance (SVR), and increases cardiac index (CI) and is thought to be cardioprotective. We decided to study whether levosimendan has any impact on the outcomes such as the duration of ventilation, the length of Intensive Care Unit (ICU) stay, and the hospital stay when compared with the nitroglycerine (NTG), which is the current standard of care at our center.

Materials and Methods:

Forty-seven patients undergoing elective coronary artery bypass surgery were randomly assigned to two groups receiving either levosimendan or NTG. The medications were started before starting surgery and continued until 24 h in the postoperative period. Baseline hemodynamic parameters were evaluated before beginning of the operation and then postoperatively at 3 different time intervals. N-terminal fragment of pro-brain natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) levels were also measured in both groups.

Results:

In comparison to the NTG group, the duration of ventilation and length of ICU stay were significantly less in levosimendan group (P < 0.05, P = 0.02). NT-proBNP level analysis showed a slow rising pattern in both groups and a statistically significant rise in the levels was observed in NTG group (P = 0.03, P = 0.02) in postoperative period when compared to levosimendan group of patients.

Conclusion:

Levosimendan treatment in patients undergoing surgical revascularization resulted in improved CI, decreased SVR and lower heart rate. And, thereby the duration of ventilation and length of ICU stay were significantly less in this group of patients when compared with NTG group.

The role of levosimendan in acute heart failure complicating acute coronary syndrome: A review and expert consensus opinion

Acute heart failure and/or cardiogenic shock are frequently triggered by ischemic coronary events. Yet, there is a paucity of randomized data on the management of patients with heart failure complicating acute coronary syndrome, as acute coronary syndrome and cardiogenic shock have frequently been defined as exclusion criteria in trials and registries. As a consequence, guideline recommendations are mostly driven by observational studies, even though these patients have a particularly poor prognosis compared to heart failure patients without signs of coronary artery disease. In acute heart failure, and especially in cardiogenic shock related to ischemic conditions, vasopressors and inotropes are used. However, both pathophysiological considerations and available clinical data suggest that these treatments may have disadvantageous effects. The inodilator levosimendan offers potential benefits due to a range of distinct effects including positive inotropy, restoration of ventriculo-arterial coupling, increases in tissue perfusion, and anti-stunning and anti-inflammatory effects. In clinical trials levosimendan improves symptoms, cardiac function, hemodynamics, and end-organ function. Adverse effects are generally less common than with other inotropic and vasoactive therapies, with the notable exception of hypotension. The decision to use levosimendan, in terms of timing and dosing, is influenced by the presence of pulmonary congestion, and blood pressure measurements. Levosimendan should be preferred over adrenergic inotropes as a first line therapy for all ACS-AHF patients who are under beta-blockade and/or when urinary output is insufficient after diuretics. Levosimendan can be used alone or in combination with other inotropic or vasopressor agents, but requires monitoring due to the risk of hypotension.

Efficacy of intravenous levosimendan in patients with heart failure complicated by acute myocardial infarction

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the efficacy of a short-term intravenous infusion of levosimendan in patients with heart failure due to acute myocardial infarction (AMI).

METHODS

This was a randomized, single-center, single-blind study that included 160 patients. Patients were randomly divided into 2 groups: 1 received levosimendan (n = 80) and the other received placebo (n = 80). The study included multiple primary end points (death, myocardial ischemia or worsening heart at the 6 month follow-up) and used a composite outcome.

RESULTS

The primary end point rate in the levosimendan group was lower than that in placebo group (43.7 vs. 62.5%, HR 0.636, 95% CI 0.413-0.981, p = 0.041). Moreover, the mortality rate at 6 months was similar between the 2 groups (17.5 vs. 22.5%, HR 0.786, 95% CI 0.382-1.543, p = 0.458). There was a higher incidence of myocardial ischemia in the levosimendan group at 14 days than in the placebo group (11.2 vs. 7.5%, HR 1.510, p = 0.435), but between 15 and 180 days, it was significantly lower in the levosimendan group than in the placebo group (3.8 vs. 13.8%, HR 0.261, p = 0.036).

CONCLUSION

Short-term intravenous infusion of levosimendan appears to be more effective than placebo for treating patients with heart failure complicated by AMI.

Levosimendan in critical illness: a literature review

Levosimendan, the active enantiomer of simendan, is a calcium sensitizer developed for treatment of decompensated heart failure, exerts its effects independently of the beta adrenergic receptor and seems beneficial in cases of severe, intractable heart failure. Levosimendan is usually administered as 24-h infusion, with or without a loading dose, but dosing needs adjustment in patients with severe liver or renal dysfunction. Despite several promising reports, the role of levosimendan in critical illness has not been thoroughly evaluated. Available evidence suggests that levosimendan is a safe treatment option in critically ill patients and may reduce mortality from cardiac failure. However, data from well-designed randomized controlled trials in critically ill patients are needed to validate or refute these preliminary conclusions. This literature review is an attempt to synthesize available evidence on the role and possible benefits of levosimendan in critically ill patients with severe heart failure.

Mechanical circulatory support in cardiogenic shock

Despite advances in coronary revascularization and widespread use of primary percutaneous interventions, cardiogenic shock complicating an acute ST-elevation myocardial infarction (CSMI) remains a clinical challenge with high mortality rates. Conservative management with catecholamines is associated with serious limitations, including arrhythmias, increased myocardial oxygen consumption, and inadequate circulatory support. Clinicians have therefore turned to mechanical means of circulatory support. Circulatory assist systems for CSMI can be distinguished by the method of placement (i.e. percutaneous vs. surgical), the type of circulatory support (i.e. left ventricular, right ventricular, or biventricular pressure and/or volume unloading), and whether they are combined with extracorporal membrane oxygenation (ECMO). The percutaneous assist systems most commonly used in CSMI are the intra-aortic balloon pump (IABP), venoarterial ECMO, the Impella pump, and the TandemHeart. Decades of clinical studies and experience demonstrated haemodynamic improvement, including elevation of diastolic perfusion pressure and cardiac output. Recently, the large randomized IABP-Shock II Trial did not show a significant reduction in 30-day mortality in CSMI with IABP insertion. There are no randomized study data available for ECMO use in CSMI. Both the Impella pump and the TandemHeart did not reduce 30-day mortality when compared with IABP in small randomized controlled trials (RCTs). In conclusion, despite the need for effective mechanical circulatory support in CSMI, current devices, as tested, have not been demonstrated to improve short- or long-term survival rates. RCTs testing the optimal timing of device therapy and optimal device design are needed to improve outcomes in CSMI.

Levosimendan decreases intracranial pressure after hypothermic circulatory arrest in a porcine model

OBJECTIVES

Hypothermic circulatory arrest (HCA) provides an optimal operating field in aortic arch surgery, but it is associated with neurological complications. Levosimendan is an inotropic agent with clinical indications for open-heart surgery. Through peripheral vasodilatation, cardiac contractility enhancement and anti-inflammatory function it has a potential to improve cerebral protection after HCA.

DESIGN

Eighteen piglets were randomly assigned to a levosimendan group (n = 9) and a placebo group (n = 9) and underwent a 60-minute period of hypothermic circulatory arrest at 18°C. A levosimendan or placebo infusion (0.2 μg/kg/min) was commenced at the onset of anesthesia and continued for 24 hours. Animals were followed for one week and their neurological recovery was assessed daily. Finally the animals were electively sacrificed and their brain was harvested for histopathological examination.

RESULTS

Levosimendan decreased intracranial pressure during the experiment. There were no differences between the groups in terms of hemodynamic or metabolic data, brain metabolism, neurological recovery or histopathology of the cerebral tissue. In the levosimendan group, cardiac enzymes were slightly more elevated.

CONCLUSIONS

Levosimendan decreased intracranial pressure during the experiment, but in terms of cerebral metabolism, neurological recovery and histopathology of the brain tissue levosimendan did not improve brain protection in this experimental setting.

[Therapeutic strategies in acute decompensated heart failure and cardiogenic shock]

As the population of elderly people is increasing, the number of patients requiring hospitalization for acute exacerbations is rising. Traditionally, these episodes of hemodynamic instability were viewed as a transient event characterized by systolic dysfunction, low cardiac output, and fluid overload. Diuretics, along with vasodilator and inotropic therapy, eventually became elements of standard care. In a multicenter observational registry (ADHERE--Acute Decompensated Heart Failure National Registry) of more than 275 hospitals, patients with acute decompensated heart failure were analyzed for their characteristics and treatments options. These data have shown that this population consists of multiple types of heart failure, various forms of acute decompensation, combinations of comorbidities, and varying degrees of disease severity. The challenges in the treatment require multidisciplinary approaches since patients typically are elderly and have complex combinations of comorbidities. So far only a limited number of drugs is currently available to treat the different groups. Over the past years it was shown that even "standard drugs" might be deleterious by induction of myocardial injury, worsening of renal function or increasing mortality upon treatment. Therefore, based on pathophysiology, different types of acute decompensated heart failure require specialized treatment strategies.

Levosimendan in the Treatment of Acute Heart Failure, Cardiogenic and Septic Shock: A Critical Review

Levosimendan is a drug which increases the sensitivity of the heart to calcium and which opens potassium channels, resulting in inodilation. Clinical trial data from patients suffering from heart failure have demonstrated that it improves haemodynamics without increasing intra-cellular calcium or oxygen consumption. However, there is no consistent evidence of mortality reduction. This narrative review summarises the key trials of its use in acute heart failure, acute coronary syndrome, cardiogenic shock and septic shock.

Cardiogenic shock

The syndrome of cardiogenic shock (CS) comprises a constellation of symptoms and signs that define a subset of patients with inadequate tissue perfusion secondary to myocardial dysfunction. Careful attention to and rapid identification of patients at risk for the development of CS and those with impending CS by both hospitalists and subspecialists will help to implement the time-sensitive therapy that it requires. Physicians should gain a familiarity with the underlying pathophysiology of CS and available diagnostic tools as well as the importance of vasopressor therapy, inotropic therapy, rapid reperfusion therapy, and mechanical support.

Emerging drugs for acute myocardial infarction

IMPORTANCE OF THE FIELD

The present review is aimed at going over the pharmacological profile (and the clinical impact) of the emerging drugs involved in the management of patients with ST-elevation myocardial infarction (STEMI) in order to provide the cardiologists who deal with these patients in the early phase with the most recent evidence on this topic.

AREAS COVERED IN THIS REVIEW

Anticoagulant and antiplatelet drugs are the main cornerstones of therapy in the treatment of STEMI patients undergoing primary percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI). The main issues that clinicians have to deal with are represented by balancing thrombotic and bleeding risks. In tailoring therapy, variables such as age, sex and previous disease should be taken into account, as well as ongoing complications (such as acute renal failure) that could affect hemostasis. Despite the well-established clinical benefits of antiplatelet agents, questions remain, mainly surrounding potential for variable platelet response, which are strictly related to non-genetic (i.e., diet, drug-drug interaction, clinical factors such as obesity, diabetes mellitus, and inflammation) and genetic determinants.

WHAT THE READER WILL GAIN

In their daily practice, cardiologists cannot abstract from the knowledge and updating on the ongoing research fields as well as the newly developed drugs, which they should frame in the very patient in the attempt to the develop a personalized medical strategy. These include also the pharmacological option(s) in the treatment of the reperfusion injury, the metabolic aspects and the stem cell therapy. TAKE HOME MASSAGE: In our opinion, the goal of ongoing research on the pharmacological approach to STEMI patients is a personalized medical strategy that relies on critical clinicians who merge newly developed acquisitions on this topic and a more complete, systemic and critical approach to the patient.

Right ventricular function in myocardial infarction complicated by cardiogenic shock: Improvement with levosimendan

OBJECTIVES

Levosimendan improves left ventricular hemodynamic function in patients with cardiogenic shock. However, its impact on right ventricular performance has not been determined. We compared the hemodynamic effects of levosimendan on left and right ventricular function in patients with intractable cardiogenic shock following myocardial infarction.

DESIGN

Observational hemodynamic study.

SETTING

Tertiary care center university hospital.

PATIENTS

Fifty-six patients with cardiogenic shock secondary to myocardial infarction were treated with percutaneous revascularization (including intra-aortic balloon pump when appropriate) and commenced on conventional inotropic therapy.

INTERVENTION

Twenty-five consecutive patients with cardiogenic shock due to myocardial infarction who had not improved sufficiently with conventional therapy (including dobutamine and norepinephrine) received levosimendan (as a bolus of 12 microg/kg per minute for 10 mins then 0.1 microg/kg per minute--0.2 mug/kg per minute) as "bail-out" therapy for 24 hrs while invasive hemodynamic parameters were recorded.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Levosimendan therapy was associated with a significant increase in cardiac index from 2.1 +/- 0.1 to 3.0 +/- 0.2 L x min x m (p < .01). In addition, levosimendan enhanced right ventricular cardiac power index (0.14 +/- 0.19 to 0.18W +/- 0.12, p < .001), while pulmonary vascular resistance fell from 227.7 +/- 94.5 to 178.1 +/- 62.3 dyne x s x cm (p = .002). No significant change in central venous pressure or mean pulmonary artery pressure was observed. The observed hemodynamic improvement was sustained after the levosimendan infusion was stopped.

CONCLUSIONS

Levosimendan infusion for cardiogenic shock following acute myocardial infarction improved hemodynamic parameters of right ventricular performance. Furthermore, we describe the use of right ventricular cardiac power index as a hemodynamic parameter of right ventricular performance.