Beneficial effects of levosimendan in infants with sepsis-associated cardiac dysfunction: report of 2 cases

Safety of Levosimendan in Pediatric Patients: An Up-to-Date Systematic Review

BACKGROUND

The potential risks associated with the use of levosimendan in the pediatric population has not been systematically evaluated. This study aimed to review the available evidence regarding the safety of this treatment.

METHODS

Bio Med Central, PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of clinical trials were searched for studies describing levosimendan administration in the pediatric population in any setting. Relevant studies were independently screened, selected, and their data extracted by two investigators. The authors excluded: reviews, meta-analyses, as well as basic research and trials involving patients >18 years old. The primary outcome was the number and the type of adverse side effects reported during levosimendan administration.

RESULTS

The updated systematic review included 48 studies, enrolling a total of 1,271 pediatric patients who received levosimendan as treatment (790 patients in the 11 studies that reported side effects). The primary adverse effects of levosimendan administration were hypotension and cardiac arrhythmias, particularly tachycardia. Hypotension occurred in approximately 28.9% of patients, while arrhythmia occurred in about 12.3% of patients. Meta analysis of RCTs revealed a rate of all-cause mortality of 2.0% (8 out of 385) in the levosimendan group compared to 3.9% (15 out of 378) in the control group (dobutamine, milrinone or placebo) (risk ratio [RR] = 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.25-1.21; P = 0.14; I2 = 0%) CONCLUSIONS: Hypotension and cardiac arrhythmia are the most reported side effects of levosimendan in pediatric patients. However, adverse events remain underreported, especially in randomized trials.

Effect of Levosimendan Treatment in Pediatric Patients With Cardiac Dysfunction: An Update of a Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Levosimendan increasingly has been used to treat heart failure and cardiac dysfunction in pediatric patients. Currently, there is only limited evidence that this drug positively affects outcomes. The authors' aim was to investigate the effects of levosimendan on hemodynamic parameters and outcomes in pediatric patients in all clinical settings. The study design was a systematic review of randomized and nonrandomized studies. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) were included in a meta-analysis. The primary outcome of the meta-analysis was the effect of levosimendan on central venous oxygen saturation (ScvO₂) and lactate values as surrogate markers of low-cardiac-output syndrome. The study setting was any acute care setting. Study participants were pediatric patients (age <18 years) receiving levosimendan, and the intervention was levosimendan versus any control treatment. The authors identified 44 studies published from 2004 to 2020, including a total of 1,131 pediatric patients. Nine studies (enrolling 547 patients) were RCTs, all performed in a pediatric cardiac surgery setting. Three RCTs were judged to carry a low risk of bias. In the RCTs, levosimendan administration was associated with a significant improvement of ScvO₂ (p = 0.03) and a trend toward lower postoperative lactate levels (p = 0.08). No differences could be found for secondary outcomes. Levosimendan use in pediatric patients is not associated with major side effects and may lead to hemodynamic improvement after cardiac surgery. However, its impact on major clinical outcomes remains to be determined. Overall, the quality of evidence for levosimendan use in pediatric patients is low, and further high-quality RCTs are needed.

Vasopressor Therapy in the Intensive Care Unit

After fluid administration for vasodilatory shock, vasopressors are commonly infused. Causes of vasodilatory shock include septic shock, post-cardiovascular surgery, post-acute myocardial infarction, postsurgery, other causes of an intense systemic inflammatory response, and drug -associated anaphylaxis. Therapeutic vasopressors are hormones that activate receptors-adrenergic: α1, α2, β1, β2; angiotensin II: AG1, AG2; vasopressin: AVPR1a, AVPR1B, AVPR2; dopamine: DA1, DA2. Vasopressor choice and dose vary widely because of patient and physician practice heterogeneity. Vasopressor adverse effects are excessive vasoconstriction causing organ ischemia/infarction, hyperglycemia, hyperlactatemia, tachycardia, and tachyarrhythmias. To date, no randomized controlled trial (RCT) of vasopressors has shown a decreased 28-day mortality rate. There is a need for evidence regarding alternative vasopressors as first-line vasopressors. We emphasize that vasopressors should be administered simultaneously with fluid replacement to prevent and decrease duration of hypotension in shock with vasodilation. Norepinephrine is the first-choice vasopressor in septic and vasodilatory shock. Interventions that decrease norepinephrine dose (vasopressin, angiotensin II) have not decreased 28-day mortality significantly. In patients not responsive to norepinephrine, vasopressin or epinephrine may be added. Angiotensin II may be useful for rapid resuscitation of profoundly hypotensive patients. Inotropic agent(s) (e.g., dobutamine) may be needed if vasopressors decrease ventricular contractility. Dopamine has fallen to almost no-use recommendation because of adverse effects; angiotensin II is available clinically; there are potent vasopressors with scant literature (e.g., methylene blue); and the novel V1a agonist selepressin missed on its pivotal RCT primary outcome. In pediatric septic shock, vasopressors, epinephrine, and norepinephrine are recommended equally because there is no clear evidence that supports the use of one vasoactive agent. Dopamine is recommended when epinephrine or norepinephrine is not available. New strategies include perhaps patients will be started on several vasopressors with complementary mechanisms of action, patients may be selected for particular vasopressors according to predictive biomarkers, and novel vasopressors may emerge with fewer adverse effects.

Surviving sepsis campaign international guidelines for the management of septic shock and sepsis-associated organ dysfunction in children

OBJECTIVES

To develop evidence-based recommendations for clinicians caring for children (including infants, school-aged children, and adolescents) with septic shock and other sepsis-associated organ dysfunction.

DESIGN

A panel of 49 international experts, representing 12 international organizations, as well as three methodologists and three public members was convened. Panel members assembled at key international meetings (for those panel members attending the conference), and a stand-alone meeting was held for all panel members in November 2018. A formal conflict-of-interest policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among the chairs, co-chairs, methodologists, and group heads, as well as within subgroups, served as an integral part of the guideline development process.

METHODS

The panel consisted of six subgroups: recognition and management of infection, hemodynamics and resuscitation, ventilation, endocrine and metabolic therapies, adjunctive therapies, and research priorities. We conducted a systematic review for each Population, Intervention, Control, and Outcomes question to identify the best available evidence, statistically summarized the evidence, and then assessed the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. We used the evidence-to-decision framework to formulate recommendations as strong or weak, or as a best practice statement. In addition, "in our practice" statements were included when evidence was inconclusive to issue a recommendation, but the panel felt that some guidance based on practice patterns may be appropriate.

RESULTS

The panel provided 77 statements on the management and resuscitation of children with septic shock and other sepsis-associated organ dysfunction. Overall, six were strong recommendations, 49 were weak recommendations, and nine were best-practice statements. For 13 questions, no recommendations could be made; but, for 10 of these, "in our practice" statements were provided. In addition, 52 research priorities were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

A large cohort of international experts was able to achieve consensus regarding many recommendations for the best care of children with sepsis, acknowledging that most aspects of care had relatively low quality of evidence resulting in the frequent issuance of weak recommendations. Despite this challenge, these recommendations regarding the management of children with septic shock and other sepsis-associated organ dysfunction provide a foundation for consistent care to improve outcomes and inform future research.

Surviving Sepsis Campaign International Guidelines for the Management of Septic Shock and Sepsis-Associated Organ Dysfunction in Children

OBJECTIVES

To develop evidence-based recommendations for clinicians caring for children (including infants, school-aged children, and adolescents) with septic shock and other sepsis-associated organ dysfunction.

DESIGN

A panel of 49 international experts, representing 12 international organizations, as well as three methodologists and three public members was convened. Panel members assembled at key international meetings (for those panel members attending the conference), and a stand-alone meeting was held for all panel members in November 2018. A formal conflict-of-interest policy was developed at the onset of the process and enforced throughout. Teleconferences and electronic-based discussion among the chairs, co-chairs, methodologists, and group heads, as well as within subgroups, served as an integral part of the guideline development process.

METHODS

The panel consisted of six subgroups: recognition and management of infection, hemodynamics and resuscitation, ventilation, endocrine and metabolic therapies, adjunctive therapies, and research priorities. We conducted a systematic review for each Population, Intervention, Control, and Outcomes question to identify the best available evidence, statistically summarized the evidence, and then assessed the quality of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. We used the evidence-to-decision framework to formulate recommendations as strong or weak, or as a best practice statement. In addition, "in our practice" statements were included when evidence was inconclusive to issue a recommendation, but the panel felt that some guidance based on practice patterns may be appropriate.

RESULTS

The panel provided 77 statements on the management and resuscitation of children with septic shock and other sepsis-associated organ dysfunction. Overall, six were strong recommendations, 52 were weak recommendations, and nine were best-practice statements. For 13 questions, no recommendations could be made; but, for 10 of these, "in our practice" statements were provided. In addition, 49 research priorities were identified.

CONCLUSIONS

A large cohort of international experts was able to achieve consensus regarding many recommendations for the best care of children with sepsis, acknowledging that most aspects of care had relatively low quality of evidence resulting in the frequent issuance of weak recommendations. Despite this challenge, these recommendations regarding the management of children with septic shock and other sepsis-associated organ dysfunction provide a foundation for consistent care to improve outcomes and inform future research.

[Vasopressors and inotropes: use in paediatrics]

The cardiovascular system is a dynamic system, which is required to ensure adequate delivery of oxygen, nutrients, and hormones to the tissues that are necessary for cell metabolism. It also synthesises and modifies the vasoactive components that regulate vascular tone and myocardial function. These vasoactive components have demonstrated their beneficial effects in the management of paediatric patients in a critical condition with heart failure and shock. However, their use and abuse brings harmful effects, increases mortality, and is associated with arrhythmias. An increase in myocardial oxygen consumption favours the presence of ischaemia, therefore it is necessary to know the mechanism of action and indications of these drugs to minimise their harmful effects. The purpose of this review is to describe the pharmacology and clinical applications of inotropic and vasopressor agents in the paediatric patient in acritical condition.

[Use of levosimendan in children]

Levosimendan is a calcium-sensitizing drug with positive inotropic properties. As an inodilator, this molecule also has a vasodilation effect. While its efficacy has been demonstrated in the adult in the context of cardiac surgery, its pediatric use is still not widespread. Many studies have shown its safety of use in children, including in the newborn. Across the world, a growing number of teams use levosimendan to treat both acute and chronic heart failure. Through a review of the literature, we describe its pharmacodynamic effects, its current applications, and its perspectives of use in children.

[Septic shock in intensive care units. Current focus on treatment]

Essential therapeutic principles in children with septic shock persist over time, although some new concepts have been recently incorporated, and fully awareness of pediatricians and intensivists is essential. Fluid resuscitation is a fundamental intervention, but the kind of ideal fluid has not been established yet, as each of these interventions has specific limitations and there is no evidence supportive of the superiority of one type of fluid. Should septic shock persists despite adequate fluid resuscitation, the use of inotropic medication and/or vasopressors is indicated. New vasoactive drugs can be used in refractory septic shock caused by vasopressors, and the use of hydrocortisone should be considered in children with suspected adrenal insufficiency, as it reduces the need for vasopressors. The indications for red blood cells transfusion or the optimal level of glycemia are still controversial, with no consensus on the threshold value for the use of these blood products or the initiation of insulin administration, respectively. Likewise, the use of high-volume hemofiltration is a controversial issue and further study is needed on the routine recommendation in the course of septic shock. Nutritional support is crucial, as malnutrition is a serious complication that should be properly prevented and treated. The aim of this paper is to provide update on the most recent advances as concerns the treatment of septic shock in the pediatric population.