Levosimendan Versus Dobutamine in Myocardial Injury Patients with Septic Shock: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Brain natriuretic peptide as a predictive marker of mortality in sepsis: an updated systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Early identification of patients with sepsis at high risk of death remains a challenge, and whether brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) or N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) has a prognostic effect on patients with sepsis is controversial. Here, we clarified the prognostic value of BNP and NT-proBNP and sought to establish suitable cutoff values and intervals.

METHODS

We searched five databases to identify studies that met the inclusion criteria. The primary outcomes were the pooled sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio (PLR), negative likelihood ratio (NLR), diagnostic odds ratio (DOR), area under the curve (AUC), and corresponding 95% credible interval (95% CI) of BNP and NT-proBNP. The secondary outcomes were the sensitivity and specificity of BNP or NT-proBNP in subgroup analyses.

RESULTS

Forty-seven studies were included in our meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity of NT-proBNP (0.77 [0.68, 0.84]) was weaker than that of BNP (0.82 [0.76, 0.87]), the pooled specificity of NT-proBNP (0.70 [0.60, 0.77]) was less than that of BNP (0.77 [0.71, 0.82]), and the AUC of BNP (0.87 [0.83-0.89]) was greater than that of NT-proBNP (0.80 (0.76-0.83]). The results of the subgroup analysis showed that the cutoff range of 400-800 pg/mL for BNP had high sensitivity (0.86 [0.74-0.98]) and specificity (0.87 [0.81-0.93]) and was probably the most appropriate cutoff range.

CONCLUSIONS

Elevated levels of BNP and NT-proBNP were significantly related to the mortality of patients with sepsis and had a moderate prognostic value in predicting the mortality of patients with sepsis. In addition, our meta-analysis preliminarily established appropriate cutoff values for BNP and NT-proBNP.

Annexin-A1 short peptide alleviates septic myocardial injury by upregulating SIRT3 and inhibiting myocardial cell apoptosis

Septic myocardial injury is a common complication of severe sepsis, which occurs in about 50% of cases. Patients with this disease may experience varying degrees of myocardial damage. Annexin-A1 short peptide (ANXA1sp), with a molecular structure of Ac-Gln-Ala-Tyr, has been reported to exert an organ protective effect in the perioperative period by modulating sirtuin-3 (SIRT3). Whether it possesses protective activity against sepsis-induced cardiomyopathy is worthy of study. This study aimed to investigate whether ANXA1sp exerts its anti-apoptotic effect in septic myocardial injury in vitro and in vivo via regulating SIRT3. In this study, we established in vivo and in vivo models of septic myocardial injury based on C57BL/6 mice and primary cardiomyocytes by lipopolysaccharide (LPS) induction. Results showed that ANXA1sp pretreatment enhanced the seven-day survival rate, improved left ventricular ejection fraction (EF), left ventricular fractional shortening (FS), and cardiac output (CO), and reduced the levels of creatine kinase-MB (CK-MB), cardiac troponin I (cTnI), and lactate dehydrogenase (LDH). Western blotting results revealed that ANXA1sp significantly increased the expression of SIRT3, Bcl-2, and downregulated Bax expression. TUNEL staining and flow cytometry results showed that ANXA1sp could attenuate the apoptosis rate of cardiomyocytes, whereas this anti-apoptotic effect was significantly attenuated after SIRT3 knockout. To sum up, ANXA1sp can alleviate LPS-induced myocardial injury by reducing myocardial apoptosis via SIRT3 upregulation.

ExtraCorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in the therapy for REfractory Septic shock with Cardiac function Under Estimated (ECMO-RESCUE): study protocol for a prospective, multicentre, non-randomised cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Severe septic cardiomyopathy (SCM) is one of the main causes of refractory septic shock (RSS), with a high mortality. The application of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) to support the impaired cardiac function in patients with septic shock remains controversial. Moreover, no prospective studies have been taken to address whether venoarterial ECMO treatment could improve the outcome of patients with sepsis-induced cardiogenic shock. The objective of this study is to assess whether venoarterial ECMO treatment can improve the 30-day survival rate of patients with sepsis-induced refractory cardiogenic shock.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

ExtraCorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in the therapy for REfractory Septic shock with Cardiac function Under Estimated is a prospective, multicentre, non-randomised, cohort study on the application of ECMO in SCM. At least 64 patients with SCM and RSS will be enrolled in an estimated ratio of 1:1.5. Participants taking venoarterial ECMO during the period of study are referred to as cohort 1, and patients receiving only conventional therapy without ECMO belong to cohort 2. The primary outcome is survival in a 30-day follow-up period. Other end points include survival to intensive care unit (ICU) discharge, hospital survival, 6-month survival, quality of life for long-term survival (EQ-5D score), successful rate of ECMO weaning, long-term survivors' cardiac function, the number of days alive without continuous renal replacement therapy, mechanical ventilation and vasopressor, ICU and hospital length of stay, the rate of complications potentially related to ECMO treatment.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The trial has been approved by the Clinical Research and Application Institutional Review Board of the Second Affiliated Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University (2020-hs-51). Participants will be screened and enrolled from ICU patients with septic shock by clinicians, with no public advertisement for recruitment. Results will be disseminated in research journals and through conference presentations.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

NCT05184296.

Effect of levosimendan on ventricular remodelling in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction: a meta-analysis

Heart failure is the final stage of several cardiovascular diseases, and the key to effectively treating heart failure is to reverse or delay ventricular remodelling. Levosimendan is a novel inotropic and vasodilator agent used in heart failure, whereas the impact of levosimendan on ventricular remodelling is still unclear. This study aims to investigate the impact of levosimendan on ventricular remodelling in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction. Electronic databases were searched to identify eligible studies. A total of 66 randomized controlled trials involving 7968 patients were included. Meta-analysis results showed that levosimendan increased left ventricular ejection fraction [mean difference (MD) = 3.62, 95% confidence interval (CI) (2.88, 4.35), P < 0.00001] and stroke volume [MD = 6.59, 95% CI (3.22, 9.96), P = 0.0001] and significantly reduced left ventricular end-systolic volume [standard mean difference (SMD) = -0.52, 95% CI (-0.67, -0.37), P < 0.00001], left ventricular end-diastolic volume index [SMD = -1.24, 95% CI (-1.61, -0.86), P < 0.00001], and left ventricular end-systolic volume index [SMD = -1.06, 95% CI (-1.43, -0.70), P < 0.00001]. In terms of biomarkers, levosimendan significantly reduced the level of brain natriuretic peptide [SMD = -1.08, 95% CI (-1.60, -0.56), P < 0.0001], N-terminal pro-brain natriuretic peptide [SMD = -0.99, 95% CI (-1.41, -0.56), P < 0.00001], and interleukin-6 [SMD = -0.61, 95% CI (-0.86, -0.35), P < 0.00001]. Meanwhile, levosimendan may increase the incidence of hypotension [risk ratio (RR) = 1.24, 95% CI (1.12, 1.39), P < 0.0001], hypokalaemia [RR = 1.57, 95% CI (1.08, 2.28), P = 0.02], headache [RR = 1.89, 95% CI (1.50, 2.39), P < 0.00001], atrial fibrillation [RR = 1.31, 95% CI (1.12, 1.52), P = 0.0005], and premature ventricular complexes [RR = 1.86, 95% CI (1.27, 2.72), P = 0.001]. In addition, levosimendan reduced all-cause mortality [RR = 0.83, 95% CI (0.74, 0.94), P = 0.002]. In conclusion, our study found that levosimendan might reverse ventricular remodelling when applied in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction, especially in patients undergoing cardiac surgery, decompensated heart failure, and septic shock.

Nicorandil Regulates Ferroptosis and Mitigates Septic Cardiomyopathy via TLR4/SLC7A11 Signaling Pathway

This study mainly explored the role of nicorandil in regulating ferroptosis and alleviating septic cardiomyopathy through toll-like receptor (TLR) 4/solute carrier family 7 member 11 (SLC7A11) signaling pathway. Twenty-four male SD rats were randomly divided into control, Nic (nicorandil), LPS (lipopolysaccharide), and LPS + Nic groups and given echocardiography. A detection kit was applied to measure the levels of lactic dehydrogenase (LDH), cardiac troponin I (cTnI), and creatine kinase-MB (CK-MB); HE staining and the levels of glutathione (GSH), malondialdehyde (MDA), total iron, and Fe2+ of myocardial tissues were detected. Moreover, the expression of TLR4 and SLC7A11 were measured by qRT-PCR and the proteins regulating ferroptosis (TLR4, SLC7A11, GPX4, ACSL4, DMT1, Fpn, and TfR1) were checked by western blot. Myocardial cells (H9C2) were induced with lipopolysaccharide (LPS) and transfected with si-TLR4 or SLC7A11-OE. Then, the viability, ferroptosis, and TLR4/SLC7A11 signaling pathway of cells were examined. Nicorandil could significantly increase left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction (LVEF) while reduce LV end-diastolic volume (LVEDV) and LV end-systolic volume (LVESV). Also, it greatly reduced the levels of LDH, cTnI, and CK-MB; alleviated the pathological changes of myocardial injury; notably decreased MDA, total iron, and Fe2+ levels in myocardial tissues; and significantly increased GSH level. Besides, nicorandil obviously raised protein levels of GPX4, Fpn, and SLC7A11, and decreased protein levels of ACSL4, DMT1, TfR1, and TLR4. After knockdown of TLR4 or overexpression of SLC7A11, the inhibition effect of nicorandil on ferroptosis was strengthened in LPS-induced H9C2 cells. Therefore, nicorandil may regulate ferroptosis through TLR4/SLC7A11 signaling, thereby alleviating septic cardiomyopathy.

The association between levosimendan and mortality in patients with sepsis or septic shock: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Levosimendan is increasingly being used in patients with sepsis or septic shock because of its potential to improve organ function and reduce mortality. We aimed to determine if levosimendan can reduce mortality in patients with sepsis or septic shock via meta-analysis.

EVIDENCE SOURCES AND STUDY SELECTION

We comprehensively searched the PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library databases from inception through 1 October 2022. Literature evaluating the efficacy of levosimendan in patients with sepsis or septic shock was included.

DATA EXTRACTION AND OUTCOME MEASUREMENTS

Two reviewers extracted data and assessed study quality. A meta-analysis was performed to calculate an odds ratio (OR), 95% confidence intervals (CI), and P -values for 28-day mortality (primary outcome). Secondary outcomes included changes in indexes reflecting cardiac function before and after treatment, changes in serum lactate levels in the first 24 h of treatment, and the mean SOFA score during the study period. Safety outcomes included rates of tachyarrhythmias and total adverse reactions encountered with levosimendan.

RESULTS

Eleven randomized controlled trials were identified, encompassing a total of 1044 patients. After using levosimendan, there was no statistical difference between groups for 28-day mortality (34.9% and 36.2%; OR: 0.93; 95% CI [0.72-1.2]; P  = 0.57; I 2  = 0%; trial sequential analysis-adjusted CI [0.6-1.42]) and sequential organ failure assessment (SOFA) score, and more adverse reactions seemed to occur in the levosimendan group, although the septic shock patient's heart function and serum lactate level improved.

CONCLUSION

There was no association between the use of levosimendan and 28-day mortality and SOFA scores in patients with septic shock, though there was statistically significant improvement in cardiac function and serum lactate.

Efficacy and safety of levosimendan in patients with sepsis: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

Objective: We conducted a systematic review to assess the advantages and disadvantages of levosimendan in patients with sepsis compared with placebo, milrinone, and dobutamine and to explore the clinical efficacy of different concentrations of levosimendan. Methods: PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Library, Embase, CNKI, Wanfang data, VIP, and CBM databases were searched using such keywords as simendan, levosimendan, and sepsis. The search time was from the establishment of the database to July 2023. Two researchers were responsible for literature screening and data collection respectively. After the risk of bias in the included studies was evaluated, network meta-analysis was performed using R software gemtc and rjags package. Results: Thirty-two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included in the network meta-analysis. Meta-analysis results showed that while levosimendan significantly improved CI levels at either 0.1 µg/kg/min (mean difference [MD] [95%CrI] = 0.41 [-0.43, 1.4]) or 0.2 µg/kg/min (MD [95%CrI] =0.54 [0.12, 0.99]). Levosimendan, at either 0.075 µg/kg/min (MD [95% CrI] =0.033 [-0.75, 0.82]) or 0.2 µg/kg/min (MD [95% CrI] = -0.014 [-0.26, 0.23]), had no significant advantage in improving Lac levels. Levosimendan, at either 0.1 µg/kg/min (RR [95% CrI] = 0.99 [0.73, 1.3]) or 0.2 µg/kg/min (RR [95% CrI] = 1.0 [0.88, 1.2]), did not have a significant advantage in reducing mortality. Conclusion: The existing evidence suggests that levosimendan can significantly improve CI and lactate levels in patients with sepsis, and levosimendan at 0.1 µg/kg/min might be the optimal dose. Unfortunately, all interventions in this study failed to reduce the 28-day mortality. Systematic Review Registration: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42023441220.

THE EFFICACY AND SAFETY OF VASOPRESSORS FOR SEPTIC SHOCK PATIENTS: A SYSTEMIC REVIEW AND NETWORK META-ANALYSIS

ABSTRACT

Background: Septic shock is a distributive shock with decreased systemic vascular resistance and MAP. Septic shock contributes to the most common causes of death in the intensive care unit (ICU). Current guidelines recommend the use of norepinephrine as the first-line vasopressor, whereas adrenergic agonists and vasopressin analogs are also commonly used by physicians. To date, very few studies have synthetically compared the effects of multiple types of vasoactive medications. The aim of this study was to systemically evaluate the efficacy of vasoactive agents both individually and in combination to treat septic shock. Methods: The PubMed, MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) were searched up to May 12, 2022, to identify relevant randomized controlled trials. A network meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the effect of different types of vasopressors. The primary outcome was 28-day all-cause mortality. The secondary outcome was the ICU length of stay. Adverse events are defined as any undesirable outcomes, including myocardial infarction, cardiac arrhythmia, peripheral ischemia, or stroke and cerebrovascular events. Findings: Thirty-three randomized controlled trials comprising 4,966 patients and assessing 8 types of vasoactive treatments were included in the network meta-analysis. The surface under the cumulative ranking curve provided a ranking of vasoactive medications in terms of 28-day all-cause mortality from most effective to least effective: norepinephrine plus dobutamine, epinephrine, vasopressin, terlipressin, norepinephrine, norepinephrine plus vasopressin, dopamine, and dobutamine. Dopamine was associated with a significantly shorter ICU stay than norepinephrine, terlipressin, and vasopressin, whereas other vasoactive medications showed no definite difference in ICU length of stay. Regarding adverse events, norepinephrine was associated with the highest incidences of myocardial infarction and peripheral ischemia. Dopamine was associated with the highest incidence of cardiac arrhythmia. Epinephrine and terlipressin were associated with the highest incidences of myocardial infarction and peripheral ischemia. Interpretation: The results of this network meta-analysis suggest that norepinephrine plus dobutamine is associated with a lower risk of 28-day mortality in septic shock patients than other vasoactive medications, and the use of dopamine is associated with a higher risk of 28-day mortality due to septic shock than norepinephrine, terlipressin, and vasopressin.

Research Progress on the Mechanism and Management of Septic Cardiomyopathy: A Comprehensive Review

Sepsis is defined as a kind of life-threatening organ dysfunction due to a dysregulated host immune response to infection and is a leading cause of mortality in the intensive care unit. Sepsis-induced myocardial dysfunction, also called septic cardiomyopathy, is a common and serious complication in patients with sepsis, which may indicate a bad prognosis. Although efforts have been made to uncover the pathophysiology of septic cardiomyopathy, a number of uncertainties remain. This article sought to review available literature to summarize the existing knowledge on current diagnostic tools and biomarkers, pathogenesis, and treatments for septic cardiomyopathy.

Role of toll-like receptor-mediated pyroptosis in sepsis-induced cardiomyopathy

Sepsis, a life-threatening dysregulated status of the host response to infection, can cause multiorgan dysfunction and mortality. Sepsis places a heavy burden on the cardiovascular system due to the pathological imbalance of hyperinflammation and immune suppression. Myocardial injury and cardiac dysfunction caused by the aberrant host responses to pathogens can lead to cardiomyopathy, one of the most critical complications of sepsis. However, many questions about the specific mechanisms and characteristics of this complication remain to be answered. The causes of sepsis-induced cardiac dysfunction include abnormal cardiac perfusion, myocardial inhibitory substances, autonomic dysfunction, mitochondrial dysfunction, and calcium homeostasis dysregulation. The fight between the host and pathogens acts as the trigger for sepsis-induced cardiomyopathy. Pyroptosis, a form of programmed cell death, plays a critical role in the progress of sepsis. Toll-like receptors (TLRs) act as pattern recognition receptors and participate in innate immune pathways that recognize damage-associated molecular patterns as well as pathogen-associated molecular patterns to mediate pyroptosis. Notably, pyroptosis is tightly associated with cardiac dysfunction in sepsis and septic shock. In line with these observations, induction of TLR-mediated pyroptosis may be a promising therapeutic approach to treat sepsis-induced cardiomyopathy. This review focuses on the potential roles of TLR-mediated pyroptosis in sepsis-induced cardiomyopathy, to shed light on this promising therapeutic approach, thus helping to prevent and control septic shock caused by cardiovascular disorders and improve the prognosis of sepsis patients.

RIGHT VENTRICULAR DYSFUNCTION IN SEPSIS: AN UPDATED NARRATIVE REVIEW

ABSTRACT

Sepsis is a multisystem disease process, which constitutes a significant public health challenge and is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Among other systems, sepsis is known to affect the cardiovascular system, which may manifest as myocardial injury, arrhythmias, refractory shock, and/or septic cardiomyopathy. Septic cardiomyopathy is defined as the reversible systolic and/or diastolic dysfunction of one or both ventricles. Left ventricle dysfunction has been extensively studied in the past, and its prognostic role in patients with sepsis is well documented. However, there is relatively scarce literature on right ventricle (RV) dysfunction and its role. Given the importance of timely detection of septic cardiomyopathy and its bearing on prognosis of patients, the role of RV dysfunction has come into renewed focus. Hence, through this review, we sought to describe the pathophysiology of RV dysfunction in sepsis and what have we learnt so far about its multifactorial nature. We also elucidate the roles of different biomarkers for its detection and prognosis, along with appropriate management of such patient population.

Efficacy of Levosimendan in the Treatment of Patients With Severe Septic Cardiomyopathy

OBJECTIVE

This study was designed to compare the effects of levosimendan and dobutamine on hemodynamics and clinical efficacy in patients with severe septic cardiomyopathy (left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] ≤35%).

DESIGN

A prospective, single-blind, randomized controlled study.

SETTING

In Baoding, China.

PARTICIPANTS

Thirty patients with severe septic cardiomyopathy treated in the authors' hospital's Department of Critical Medicine from September 2018 to September 2021 were enrolled in this study.

INTERVENTIONS

These patients were divided randomly into the levosimendan group and dobutamine group. The LVEF, cardiac index (CI), stroke volume index (SVI), systemic vascular resistance index, heart rate, norepinephrine dose, and lactate at the time of enrollment and the 24th hour were compared, along with myocardial injury markers on the third day, C-reactive protein, mechanical ventilation time, length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, cost, and 28-day mortality. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

At the 24th hour after treatment, CI, LVEF, SVI, and fluid volume were found to be higher in the levosimendan group than in the dobutamine group, whereas the dose of norepinephrine was lower in the former rather than the latter group. On the third day of treatment, cardiac troponin I in the levosimendan group was lower than that in the dobutamine group. Although the differences in 28-day mortality, ICU stay, and ICU treatment cost between the groups were not statistically significant, the ventilator application time of the levosimendan group was significantly shorter than that of the dobutamine group.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared with dobutamine, levosimendan was more effective at improving cardiac function, reducing myocardial injury, and reducing mechanical ventilation time in patients with severe septic cardiomyopathy.

The Correlation Between Whole Blood Copper (Cu), Zinc (Zn) Levels and Cu/Zn Ratio and Sepsis-Induced Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction (SILVSD) in Patients with Septic Shock: A Single-Center Prospective Observational Study

Purpose

This study aimed to explore relationships between whole blood copper (Cu), zinc (Zn) and Cu/Zn ratio and cardiac dysfunction in patients with septic shock.

Subjects and Methods

Between April 2018 and March 2020, septic shock patients with sepsis-induced left ventricular systolic dysfunction (SILVSD, left ventricular ejection fraction, LVEF<50%) and with no sepsis-induced myocardial dysfunction (non-SIMD, septic shock alone and LVEF>50%) and controls were prospectively enrolled. Whole blood Cu and Zn levels were measured using flame atomic absorption spectrophotometry.

Results

Eighty-six patients with septic shock including both 41 SILVSD and 45 non-SIMD and 25 controls were studied. Whole blood Cu levels and Cu/Zn ratio were significantly higher and Zn levels were lower in SILVSD compared with non-SIMD and controls (Cu, p=0.009, <0.001; Zn, p=0.029, <0.001; Cu/Zn ratio, p=0.003, <0.001). Both increased whole blood Cu and Cu/Zn ratio and reduced Zn were associated with lower LVEF (all p<0.001) and higher amino-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) (Cu, p=0.002; Zn, p<0.001; Cu/Zn ratio, p<0.001) and had predictive values for SILVSD (Cu, AUC=0.666, p=0.005; Zn, AUC=0.625, p=0.039; Cu/Zn ratio, AUC=0.674, p=0.029). Whole blood Cu levels and Cu/Zn ratio were increased but Zn levels were reduced in non-survivors compared with survivors (Cu, p<0.001; Zn, p<0.001; Cu/Zn ratio, p<0.001). Whole blood Cu and Zn displayed the value of predicting 28-day mortality (Cu, AUC = 0.802, p<0.001; Zn, AUC=0.869, p<0.001; Cu/Zn ratio, AUC=0.902, p<0.001).

Conclusion

Findings of the study suggest that whole blood Cu levels and Cu/Zn ratio are increased in SILVSD patients and positively correlated with cardiac dysfunction, while whole blood Zn levels are reduced and negatively associated with cardiac dysfunction. Moreover, both whole blood Cu, Zn and Cu/Zn ratio might distinguish between SILVSD and non-SIMD in septic shock patients and predict 28-day mortality.

Trial Registration

Registered at http://www.chictr.org.cn/ChiCTR1800015709.

Levosimendan versus dobutamine for sepsis-induced cardiac dysfunction: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Levosimendan and dobutamine are extensively used to treat sepsis-associated cardiovascular failure in ICU. Nevertheless, the role and mechanism of levosimendan in patients with sepsis-induced cardiomyopathy remains unclear. Moreover, previous studies on whether levosimendan is superior to dobutamine are still controversial. More importantly, these studies did not take changes (before-after comparison to the baseline) in quantitative parameters such as ejection fraction into account with the baseline level. Here, we aimed to determine the pros and cons of the two medicines by assessing the changes in cardiac function and blood lactate, mortality, with the standardized mean difference used as a summary statistic. Relevant studies were obtained by a thorough and disciplined literature search in several notable academic databases, including Google Scholar, PubMed, Cochrane Library and Embase until November 2020. Outcomes included changes in cardiac function, lactic acid, mortality and length of hospital stay. A total of 6 randomized controlled trials were included in this study, including 192 patients. Compared with dobutamine, patients treated with levosimendan had a greater improvement of cardiac index (ΔCI) (random effects, SMD = 0.90 [0.20,1.60]; I2 = 76%, P < 0.01) and left ventricular stroke work index (ΔLVSWI) (random effects, SMD = 1.56 [0.90,2.21]; I2 = 65%, P = 0.04), a significant decrease of blood lactate (Δblood lactate) (random effects, MD =  - 0.79 [- 1.33, - 0.25]; I2 = 68%, P < 0.01) at 24-h after drug intervention, respectively. There was no significant difference between levosimendan and dobutamine on all-cause mortality in ICU (fixed effect, OR = 0.72 [0.39,1.33]; I2 = 0%, P = 0.99). We combine effect sizes related to different measurement parameters to evaluate cardiac function, which implied that septic patients with myocardial dysfunction might have a better improvement of cardiac function by levosimendan than dobutamine (random effects, SMD = 1.05 [0.69,1.41]; I2 = 67%, P < 0.01). This study suggested a significant improvement of CI, LVSWI, and decrease of blood lactate in septic patients with myocardial dysfunction in ICU after 24-h administration of levosimendan than dobutamine. However, the administration of levosimendan has neither an impact on mortality nor LVEF. Septic patients with myocardial dysfunction may partly benefit from levosimendan than dobutamine, mainly embodied in cardiac function improvement.

Septic Cardiomyopathy: From Basics to Management Choices

Septic cardiomyopathy (SCM) is increasingly recognized as a potential complication of septic shock; it is understood to be a reversible left ventricular systolic dysfunction. The presence of SCM in septic shock, in previous studies, infer a poorer prognosis as it significantly increases the mortality rate of patients to 70%-90% and its incidence varies from 18% to 40% of septic shock patients. The pathogenesis is unclear, but believed to be a combination of bacterial toxins, cytokines, nitric oxide, and cardiac mitochondrial dysfunction, that depresses intrinsic cardiac contractility. The presence of SCM can be diagnosed in patients using a bedside transthoracic echocardiogram which typically shows left ventricular ejection fraction <45% and right ventricular dilatation. For management, levosimendan provides a good hemodynamic response without increasing cardiac oxygen demand when compared to dobutamine, while more invasive techniques such as extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and intra-aortic balloon pulsation are being explored as well as potential rescue strategies for patients with severe SCM.

[Effect of vasoactive agents on the prognosis of children in the third stage of hand-foot-mouth disease]

OBJECTIVE

To study the effect of the application timing of vasoactive agents on the prognosis of children in the third stage of hand-foot-mouth disease (HFMD).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on the medical data of children in the third stage of HFMD between April 2012 and September 2016. According to the application time of vasoactive agents (milrinone combined with phentolamine) after admission, the children were divided into an early stage (within 2 hours after admission) group with 32 children, a middle stage (within 2-6 hours after admission) group with 28 children, and a late stage (more than 6 hours after admission) group with 26 children. Venous blood samples were collected before vasoactive agent treatment and after 24 hours of vasoactive agent treatment to measure the levels of creatine kinase-MB (CK-MB), troponin (TnI), and brain natriuretic peptide (BNP). The recovery time of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), respiratory rate, blood pressure, and heart rate were recorded. The response rate to the treatment within 72 hours of treatment was evaluated.

RESULTS

The early stage group had a significantly higher overall response rate to the treatment than the middle stage and late stage groups (P<0.0167). After 24 hours of treatment, there were significant differences in heart rate, blood pressure, respiratory rate, and LVEF among the three groups (P<0.05). The early stage group showed the most significant improvement in these parameters (P<0.0167). Compared with the middle stage and late stage groups, the early stage group had significantly shorter recovery time of LVEF, respiratory rate, heart rate, and blood pressure (P<0.0167). After 24 hours of treatment, the early stage group had a significantly lower level of BNP than the middle stage and late stage groups (P<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Vasoactive agents should be given to children with critical HFMD as early as possible to improve cardiovascular function, reduce the risk of disease progression, and improve prognosis.

[Effect of vasoactive agents on the prognosis of children in the third stage of hand-foot-mouth disease]

OBJECTIVE

To study the effect of the application timing of vasoactive agents on the prognosis of children in the third stage of hand-foot-mouth disease (HFMD).

METHODS

A retrospective analysis was performed on the medical data of children in the third stage of HFMD between April 2012 and September 2016. According to the application time of vasoactive agents (milrinone combined with phentolamine) after admission, the children were divided into an early stage (within 2 hours after admission) group with 32 children, a middle stage (within 2-6 hours after admission) group with 28 children, and a late stage (more than 6 hours after admission) group with 26 children. Venous blood samples were collected before vasoactive agent treatment and after 24 hours of vasoactive agent treatment to measure the levels of creatine kinase-MB (CK-MB), troponin (TnI), and brain natriuretic peptide (BNP). The recovery time of left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), respiratory rate, blood pressure, and heart rate were recorded. The response rate to the treatment within 72 hours of treatment was evaluated.

RESULTS

The early stage group had a significantly higher overall response rate to the treatment than the middle stage and late stage groups (P<0.0167). After 24 hours of treatment, there were significant differences in heart rate, blood pressure, respiratory rate, and LVEF among the three groups (P<0.05). The early stage group showed the most significant improvement in these parameters (P<0.0167). Compared with the middle stage and late stage groups, the early stage group had significantly shorter recovery time of LVEF, respiratory rate, heart rate, and blood pressure (P<0.0167). After 24 hours of treatment, the early stage group had a significantly lower level of BNP than the middle stage and late stage groups (P<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Vasoactive agents should be given to children with critical HFMD as early as possible to improve cardiovascular function, reduce the risk of disease progression, and improve prognosis.

Reporting of Organ Support Outcomes in Septic Shock Randomized Controlled Trials: A Methodologic Review-The Sepsis Organ Support Study

OBJECTIVES

Many recent randomized controlled trials in the field of septic shock failed to demonstrate a benefit on mortality. Randomized controlled trials increasingly report organ support duration and organ support-free days as primary or secondary outcomes. We conducted a methodologic systematic review to assess how organ support outcomes were defined and reported in septic shock randomized controlled trials.

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE via PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Web of Science.

STUDY SELECTION

We included randomized controlled trials published between January 2004 and March 2018 that involved septic shock adults and assessed organ support duration and/or organ support-free days for hemodynamic support, respiratory support, or renal replacement therapy.

DATA EXTRACTION

For each randomized controlled trial, we extracted the definitions of organ support duration and organ support-free days. We particularly evaluated how nonsurvivors were accounted for. Study authors were contacted to provide any missing information regarding these definitions.

DATA SYNTHESIS

We included 28 randomized controlled trials. Organ support duration and organ support-free days outcomes were reported in 17 and 15 randomized controlled trials, respectively, for hemodynamic support, 15 and 15 for respiratory support, and five and nine for renal replacement therapy. Nonsurvivors were included in the organ support duration calculation in 13 of 14 randomized controlled trials (93%) for hemodynamic support and nine of 10 (90%) for respiratory support. The organ support-free days definition for hemodynamic support, respiratory support, and renal replacement therapy was reported in six of 15 randomized controlled trials (40%), eight of 15 randomized controlled trials (53%), and six of nine randomized controlled trials (67%) reporting an organ support-free days outcome, respectively. Of these, one half assigned "0" to nonsurvivors, and the other half attributed one point per day alive free of organ support up to a predefined time point.

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights the heterogeneity and infrequency of organ support duration/organ support-free days outcome reporting in septic shock trials. When reported, the definitions of these outcome measures and methods of calculation are also infrequently reported, in particular how nonsurvivors were accounted for, which may have an important impact on interpretation.

Combination era, using combined vasopressors showed benefits in treating septic shock patients: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Septic shock is one of the major healthcare problems, affecting millions of people around the world every year. The object of this study is to find the best kind of regimen of vasopressors treatment in septic shock.

Methods

The PubMed, and the Web of Science were used to find the included studies. Stata 15.1 was performed to this systemic review and network meta-analysis.

Results

After searching and screening the articles, finally we included articles about 31 randomized controlled trials (RCTs), 11 arms (dopamine, dopexamine, epinephrine, norepinephrine, norepinephrine + dobutamine, norepinephrine + dopexamine, norepinephrine + epinephrine, norepinephrine + vasopressin, phenylephrine, terlipressin, vasopressin) and total 5,928 patients with septic shock. Compared with dopamine, the regimens (epinephrine, norepinephrine, norepinephrine + dobutamine, and vasopressin) have significantly lower 28-day mortality. Ranking the regimens in the order of estimated probabilities of each treatment by using the network meta-analysis for 28-day mortality, the result showed that norepinephrine + dopexamine was the best one (57.3%), followed by norepinephrine + epinephrine (14.8%), norepinephrine + dobutamine (10.9%), dopexamine (11.2%), terlipressin (9.8%), norepinephrine + vasopressin (2.4%), phenylephrine (1.2%), epinephrine (1.0%), vasopressin (0.5%), norepinephrine (0.0%), and dopamine (0.0%). In addition, for the results of arrhythmia and increased heart rate, the combination regimens groups did not showed inferiority to other single regimen groups.

Conclusions

Single dopamine had significantly higher 28d mortality. Combination regimens of vasopressors accounted for the best three therapeutic regimens. In treating patients with septic shock, using combining regimens probably gets more benefits.

Multiorgan Drug Action of Levosimendan in Critical Illnesses

Cardiotonic drugs mainly include digitalis, catecholamines, phosphodiesterase inhibitors, and calcium sensitizers, which have been successively discovered and applied in clinical practice. However, there are only a few new drugs available in this field, and the selection is very limited. Digitalis, catecholamines, and phosphodiesterase inhibitors increase myocardial contractility by increasing intracellular concentrations of cyclic adenosine monophosphate (cAMP) and Ca²⁺, and this increase in intracellular calcium ion concentration enhances myocardial oxygen consumption and causes arrhythmia. For these reasons, the research focus on positive inotropic agents has shifted from calcium mobilization to calcium sensitization. Intracellular calcium sensitizers are more effective and safer drugs because they do not increase the intracellular concentration of calcium ions. However, only three calcium sensitizers have been fully developed and used in the past three decades. One of these drugs, levosimendan, has multiple molecular targets and exerts its pharmacological effects by not only increasing myocardial contractility, but also enhancing respiratory muscle function and liver and kidney protection, and it is useful for patients with severe sepsis and septic shock. Recently, more than 60 randomized controlled clinical trials of levosimendan have been reported; however, these clinical trials have occasionally shown different findings. This article reviews the research progress of levosimendan in critical illnesses in recent years.

Comparative efficacy of vasoactive medications in patients with septic shock: a network meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Background

Catecholamines, especially norepinephrine, are the most frequently used vasopressors for treating patients with septic shock. During the recent decades, terlipressin, vasopressin V1A agonist, and even Ca²⁺ sensitizer were increasingly used by physicians. The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of such different kinds of vasoactive medications on mortality among patients with septic shock.

Methods

Relevant randomized controlled trials were identified by searching PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials updated to February 22, 2018. A network meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the effect of different types of vasoactive medications. The primary outcome was 28-day mortality. Intensive care unit (ICU) mortality, hospital and ICU length of stay (LOS), and adverse events were also assessed.

Results

A total of 43 trials with 5767 patients assessing 17 treatment modalities were included. Treatments ranking based on surface under the cumulative ranking curve values from largest to smallest were NE/DB 85.9%, TP 75.1%, NE/EP 74.6%, PI 74.1%, EP 72.5%, VP 66.1%, NE 59.8%, PE 53.0%, DA 42.1%, DX 38.2%, SP 27.0%, PA 24.3%, EX 22.8%, LE 21.5%, and DB 13.3% for 28-day mortality. Treatments ranking for ICU mortality were TP/NE 86.4%, TP 80.3%, TP/DB/NE 65.7%, VP/NE 62.8%, NE 57.4%, VP 56.5%, PE 48.4%, DA 33.0%, PA 27.5%, LE 22.1%, and DB 9.9%. The incidence of myocardial infarction was reported with NE/EP 3.33% (n = 1 of 30), followed by EP 3.11% (n = 5 of 161), and then VP 3.10% (n = 19 of 613), NE 3.03% (n = 43 of 1417), DA 2.21% (n = 19 of 858), NE/DB 2.01% (n = 4 of 199), LE 1.16% (n = 3 of 258), and PA 0.39% (n = 1 of 257). The incidence of arrhythmia was reported with DA 26.01% (n = 258 of 992), followed by EP 22.98% (n = 37 of 161), and then NE/DB 20.60% (n = 41 of 199), NE/EP 20.0% (n = 6 of 30), NE 8.33% (n = 127 of 1525), LE 5.81% (n = 15 of 258), PA 2.33% (n = 6 of 257), and VP 1.67% (n = 10 of 600).

Conclusions

The use of norepinephrine plus dobutamine was associated with lower 28-day mortality for septic shock, especially among patients with lower cardiac output.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (10.1186/s13054-019-2427-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Levosimendan as a new force in the treatment of sepsis-induced cardiomyopathy: mechanism and clinical application

The heart is one of the organs most vulnerable to sepsis. This review describes the general characteristics of sepsis-induced cardiomyopathy and the main pathogenesis of myocardial dysfunction in sepsis. Levosimendan is a novel drug for treatment of sepsis-induced myocardial dysfunction. This review also elaborates on the pathogenesis of levosimendan, including the mechanisms of its anti-inflammatory effects, improvement of myocardial ischaemia, increased synthesis of nitric oxide, vascular endothelial cell protection, increased myocardial contractility, improved diastolic function, and inhibition of hypoxia-inducible factor-1α expression. Many clinical studies have proven that levosimendan effectively prevents myocardial dysfunction in sepsis. In addition to the widespread use of levosimendan in patients with heart failure, the role of levosimendan in the treatment of patients with sepsis-induced cardiomyopathy will be increasingly studied and applied in the future.

Effect of levosimendan on mortality in severe sepsis and septic shock: a meta-analysis of randomised trials

OBJECTIVE

We aim to synthesise up-to-date randomised trials to investigate the effects of levosimendan on mortality and clinical outcomes in severe sepsis and septic shock.

METHODS

A collection of databases including PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register and Web of Science were searched updated to August 2017. Randomised trials were included when they pertain to the use of levosimendan in severe sepsis or septic shock compared with any category of inotropes, or as an adjunct to standard therapy with mortality reported. The primary outcome was mortality, and the secondary outcomes were clinical performances including serum lactate, cardiac function, vasopressor requirement and fluid infusion.

RESULTS

A total of 10 studies with 1036 patients were included in this meta-analysis. The results revealed that levosimendan could not reduce mortality significantly in severe sepsis and septic shock (OR 0.89, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.16, P=0.39). Levosimendan use could reduce serum lactate more effectively, and enhance cardiac contractibility with increased cardiac index and left ventricular ejection fraction. However, its use could also increase fluid infusion but not reduce norepinephrine dose. No significant benefit in mortality could be observed of levosimendan versus dobutamine use, or in patients with proven cardiac dysfunction.

CONCLUSIONS

Current evidence is not sufficient to support levosimendan as superior to dobutamine or as an optimal adjunct in severe sepsis and septic shock. More large-scale randomised trials are necessary to validate levosimendan use in sepsis.

Inotropic agents and vasodilator strategies for the treatment of cardiogenic shock or low cardiac output syndrome

BACKGROUND

Cardiogenic shock (CS) and low cardiac output syndrome (LCOS) as complications of acute myocardial infarction (AMI), heart failure (HF) or cardiac surgery are life-threatening conditions. While there is a broad body of evidence for the treatment of people with acute coronary syndrome under stable haemodynamic conditions, the treatment strategies for people who become haemodynamically unstable or develop CS remain less clear. We have therefore summarised here the evidence on the treatment of people with CS or LCOS with different inotropic agents and vasodilative drugs. This is the first update of a Cochrane review originally published in 2014.

OBJECTIVES

To assess efficacy and safety of cardiac care with positive inotropic agents and vasodilator strategies in people with CS or LCOS due to AMI, HF or cardiac surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and CPCI-S Web of Science in June 2017. We also searched four registers of ongoing trials and scanned reference lists and contacted experts in the field to obtain further information. No language restrictions were applied.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials in people with myocardial infarction, heart failure or cardiac surgery complicated by cardiogenic shock or LCOS.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 13 eligible studies with 2001 participants (mean or median age range 58 to 73 years) and two ongoing studies. We categorised studies into eight comparisons, all against cardiac care and additional other active drugs or placebo. These comparisons investigated the efficacy of levosimendan versus dobutamine, enoximone or placebo, epinephrine versus norepinephrine-dobutamine, amrinone versus dobutamine, dopexamine versus dopamine, enoximone versus dopamine and nitric oxide versus placebo.All trials were published in peer-reviewed journals, and analysis was done by the intention-to-treat (ITT) principle. Twelve of 13 trials were small with few included participants. Acknowledgement of funding by the pharmaceutical industry or missing conflict of interest statements emerged in five of 13 trials. In general, confidence in the results of analysed studies was reduced due to serious study limitations, very serious imprecision or indirectness. Domains of concern, which show a high risk of more than 50%, include performance bias (blinding of participants and personnel) and bias affecting the quality of evidence on adverse events.Levosimendan may reduce short-term mortality compared to a therapy with dobutamine (RR 0.60, 95% CI 0.37 to 0.95; 6 studies; 1776 participants; low-quality evidence; NNT: 16 (patients with moderate risk), NNT: 5 (patients with CS)). This initial short-term survival benefit with levosimendan vs. dobutamine is not confirmed on long-term follow up. There is uncertainty (due to lack of statistical power) as to the effect of levosimendan compared to therapy with placebo (RR 0.48, 95% CI 0.12 to 1.94; 2 studies; 55 participants, very low-quality evidence) or enoximone (RR 0.50, 95% CI 0.22 to 1.14; 1 study; 32 participants, very low-quality evidence).All comparisons comparing other positive inotropic, inodilative or vasodilative drugs presented uncertainty on their effect on short-term mortality with very low-quality evidence and based on only one RCT. These single studies compared epinephrine with norepinephrine-dobutamine (RR 1.25, 95% CI 0.41 to 3.77; 30 participants), amrinone with dobutamine (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.04 to 2.85; 30 participants), dopexamine with dopamine (no in-hospital deaths from 70 participants), enoximone with dobutamine (two deaths from 40 participants) and nitric oxide with placebo (one death from three participants).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Apart from low quality of evidence data suggesting a short-term mortality benefit of levosimendan compared with dobutamine, at present there are no robust and convincing data to support a distinct inotropic or vasodilator drug-based therapy as a superior solution to reduce mortality in haemodynamically unstable people with cardiogenic shock or LCOS.Considering the limited evidence derived from the present data due to a generally high risk of bias and imprecision, it should be emphasised that there remains a great need for large, well-designed randomised trials on this topic to close the gap between daily practice in critical care medicine and the available evidence. It seems to be useful to apply the concept of 'early goal-directed therapy' in cardiogenic shock and LCOS with early haemodynamic stabilisation within predefined timelines. Future clinical trials should therefore investigate whether such a therapeutic concept would influence survival rates much more than looking for the 'best' drug for haemodynamic support.

Effects of levosimendan on mortality in patients with septic shock: systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis

Object

Several studies have investigated a survival benefit for levosimendan treatment in patients with septic shock. However, data are conflicting. We conducted a meta-analysis to evaluate the effect of levosimendan treatment on mortality in patients with septic shock.

Materials and Methods

We searched PubMed, EMBASE and Cochrane Library Databases up to March 27, 2017, without language restrictions. We searched for terms related to septic shock, levosimendan, randomized clinical trial. Randomized controlled trials reported the effect of levosimendan on mortality were included. Moreover, we constructed the trial sequential analysis (TSA) to determine the reliability of the outcomes. Furthermore, secondary outcomes were cardiac index(CI), mean arterial pressure (MAP), blood lactate, norepinephrine dose and length of ICU stay.

Results

Ten studies with a total of 816 patients were included in this meta-analysis. There was no significant difference in the mortality between the levosimendan group and the standard inotropic therapy group [RR = 0.96, 95% CI (0.81–1.12), I² = 0]. However, methods adapted from formal interim monitoring boundaries applied to TSA indicated that the cumulative evidence was unreliable and inconclusive. Blood lactate was significantly reduced in the levosimendan group while there was no difference in MAP, CI, norepinephrine dose and length of ICU stay.

Conclusions

Findings from this meta-analysis demonstrated that levosimendan treatment may not reduce mortality in patients with septic shock. The result remains inclusive and further randomized controlled trials were needed to confirm these conclusions.

Levosimendan does not provide mortality benefit over dobutamine in adult patients with septic shock: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

Despite of advancement in intensive care medicine, sepsis and septic shock carry a high mortality. Levosimendan, an inodilator, may be promising for septic shock patients with myocardial dysfunction; however, firm evidence is lacking. In this meta- analysis of randomized controlled trials, levosimendan has been compared with dobutamine in adult patients with sepsis and septic shock.

DESIGN

Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

Intensive-care unit.

PARTICIPANTS

Adult septic shock patients.

INTERVENTION

Adult septic shock patients received dobutamine or levosimendan.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURE

Mortality at longest follow-up, blood lactate level, cardiac index and noradrenaline requirement.

RESULTS

Data from 7 randomized trials have been included in this meta-analysis. Levosimendan has no benefit in terms of mortality at longest follow up in comparison to dobutamine (Odds ratio 0.77, 95% CI 0.45, 132; p=0.34) and length of ICU stay (MD -4.7days, 95% CI -10.3, 0.9days, p=0.10). Patients received levosimendan had less blood lactate level (standardized mean difference -0.95; 95% CI -1.64, -0.27; p=0.006) and higher cardiac index (mean difference 0.44; 95% CI 0.17, 0.71; p=0.001). Noradrenaline requirements are similar in both the groups.

CONCLUSION

There is no evidence that levosimendan is superior to dobutamine in adult patients with sepsis and septic shock. Further large randomized trials are necessary in this area.

Effects of Early Continuous Venovenous Hemofiltration on E-Selectin, Hemodynamic Stability, and Ventilatory Function in Patients with Septic-Shock-Induced Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome

Objective. To investigate the effects of 72-hour early-initiated continuous venovenous hemofiltration (ECVVH) treatment in patients with septic-shock-induced acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) (not acute kidney injury, AKI) with regard to serum E-selectin and measurements of lung function and hemodynamic stability. Methods. This prospective nonblinded single institutional randomized study involved 51 patients who were randomly assigned to receive or not receive ECVVH, an ECVVH group (n = 24) and a non-ECVVH group (n = 27). Besides standard therapies, patients in ECVVH group underwent CVVH for 72 h. Results. At 0 and 24 h after initiation of treatment, arterial partial pressure of oxygen/fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO₂/FiO₂) ratio, extravascular lung water index (EVLWI), and E-selectin level were not significantly different between groups (all P > 0.05). Compared to non-ECVVH group, PaO₂/FiO₂ is significantly higher and EVLWI and E-selectin level are significantly lower in ECVVH group (all P < 0.05) at 48 h and 72 h after initiation of treatment. The lengths of mechanical ventilation and stay in intensive care unit (ICU) were shorter in ECVVH group (all P < 0.05), but there was no difference in 28-day mortality between two groups. Conclusions. In patients with septic-shock-induced ARDS (not AKI), treatment with ECVVH in addition to standard therapies improves endothelial function, lung function, and hemodynamic stability and reduces the lengths of mechanical ventilation and stay in ICU.