Search

We present a case of a 58-year-old male patient with end-stage heart failure due to ischemic heart disease for which a HeartMate II left ventricular assist device (LVAD) was implanted in 2013. Levosimendan has been used successfully to treat acute RVF in the several cardiac settings[[1]] To the best of our knowledge, this is the first report of successful use of intermittent levosimendan treatment in a LVAD patient with late RVF. [Extracted from the article]

Abstract: Aims: Intermittent levosimendan administration has been suggested to improve survival in patients with advanced heart failure (AdHF). Quality of life is a key issue for AdHF patients and is negatively affected by frequent hospitalizations. Methods and results: CENTRAL, Google Scholar, MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Central Register of clinical trials (updated 15/1/2017) were searched for randomized controlled trials investigating the effect of intermittent levosimendan administration in patients with AdHF. The primary outcome was the number of patients requiring rehospitalization 3 months after the end of treatment. A total of 319 patients from six trials were included. Overall pooled analysis showed that the use of levosimendan was associated with a significant reduction in the number of rehospitalizations at 3 months: 33/207 (16%) vs. 39/113 (35%), risk ratio 0.40, 95% confidence interval 0.27–0.59, P < 0.001, I2 = 0%. This result was confirmed by sensitivity analyses. Conclusions: Within the limitations of this meta‐analysis including also studies in which endpoints were not independently adjudicated and not clearly specified, repetitive or intermittent administration of levosimendan for patients with AdHF was associated with a reduction in the rehospitalization rate at 3 months. Large, high‐quality randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm this finding. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Medizinische Klinik: Intensivmedizin & Notfallmedizin is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Background: Following the results of randomized controlled trials on levosimendan, French health authorities requested an update of the current use and side-effects of this medication on a national scale. Method: The France-LEVO registry was a prospective observational cohort study reflecting the indications, dosing regimens, and side-effects of levosimendan, as well as patient outcomes over a year. Results: The patients included (n = 602) represented 29.6% of the national yearly use of levosimendan in France. They were treated for cardiogenic shock (n = 250, 41.5%), decompensated heart failure (n = 127, 21.1%), cardiac surgery-related low cardiac output prophylaxis and/or treatment (n = 86, 14.3%), and weaning from veno-arterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (n = 82, 13.6%). They received 0.18 ± 0.07 µg/kg/min levosimendan over 26 ± 8 h. An initial bolus was administered in 45 patients (7.5%), 103 (17.1%) received repeated infusions, and 461 (76.6%) received inotropes and or vasoactive agents concomitantly. Hypotension was reported in 218 patients (36.2%), atrial fibrillation in 85 (14.1%), and serious adverse events in 17 (2.8%). 136 patients (22.6%) died in hospital, and 26 (4.3%) during the 90-day follow-up. Conclusions: We observed that levosimendan was used in accordance with recent recommendations by French physicians. Hypotension and atrial fibrillation remained the most frequent side-effects, while serious adverse event potentially attributable to levosimendan were infrequent. The results suggest that this medication was safe and potentially associated with some benefit in the population studied. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Open in new tab Download slide OBJECTIVES Early right-sided heart failure (RHF) was seen in 22% of recipients of a left ventricular assist device (LVAD) in the European Registry for Patients with Mechanical Circulatory Support (EUROMACS). However, the optimal treatment of post-LVAD RHF is not well known. Levosimendan has proven to be effective in patients with cardiogenic shock and in those with end-stage heart failure. We sought to evaluate the efficacy of levosimendan on post-LVAD RHF and 30-day and 1-year mortality. METHODS The EUROMACS Registry was used to identify adults with mainstream continuous-flow LVAD implants who were treated with preoperative levosimendan compared to a propensity matched control cohort. RESULTS In total, 3661 patients received mainstream LVAD, of which 399 (11%) were treated with levosimendan pre-LVAD. Patients given levosimendan had a higher EUROMACS RHF score [4 (2– 5.5) vs 2 (2– 4); P  < 0.001], received more right ventricular assist devices (RVAD) [32 (8%) vs 178 (5.5%); P  = 0.038] and stayed longer in the intensive care unit post-LVAD implant [19 (8–35) vs 11(5–25); P  < 0.001]. Yet, there was no significant difference in the rate of RHF, 30-day, or 1-year mortality. Also, in the matched cohort (357 patients taking levosimendan compared to an average of 622 controls across 20 imputations), we found no evidence for a difference in postoperative severe RHF, RVAD implant rate, length of stay in the intensive care unit or 30-day and 1-year mortality. CONCLUSIONS In this analysis of the EUROMACS registry, we found no evidence for an association between levosimendan and early RHF or death, albeit patients taking levosimendan had much higher risk profiles. For a definitive conclusion, a multicentre, randomized study is warranted. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The article discusses the vulnerability of patients with heart failure during the transitional period following hospitalization. This period poses a high risk for worsening of the disease, with increased rates of rehospitalization or death. The article suggests three approaches to address this vulnerability: disease modification through rapid neurohormonal drug titration, haemodynamic-directed therapy to alleviate circulatory impairment, and invasive Laplace therapies for advanced stages of heart failure. The effectiveness of these approaches is discussed, with a focus on the limitations of haemodynamically directed interventions using intermittent drug infusions. The article emphasizes the need for tough transitional tactics to improve outcomes during this vulnerable period. [Extracted from the article]

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

Levosimendan is an inodilator drug that, given its unique pharmacological actions and safety profile, represents a viable therapeutic option in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction in the advanced stage of the disease (advHFrEF). Pulsed levosimendan infusion in patients with advHFrEF improves symptoms and clinical and hemodynamic status, prevents recurrent hospitalizations, and enables optimization of guidelines-directed medical therapy. Furthermore, considering its proprieties on right ventricular function and pulmonary circulation, levosimendan could be helpful for the prevention and treatment of the right ventricular dysfunction post-implanting a left ventricular assist device. However, to date, evidence on this issue is scarce and has yielded mixed results. Finally, preliminary experiences indicate that treatment with levosimendan at scheduled intervals may serve as a "bridge to transplant" strategy in patients with advHFrEF. In this review, we summarized the clinical pharmacology of levosimendan, the available evidence in the treatment of patients with advHFrEF, as well as a hypothesis for its use in patients with advanced heart failure with preserved ejection fraction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The introduction of multiple new pharmacological agents over the past three decades in the field of heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) has led to reduced rates of mortality and hospitalizations, and consequently the prevalence of HFrEF has increased, and up to 10% of patients progress to more advanced stages, characterized by high rates of mortality, hospitalizations, and poor quality of life. Advanced HFrEF patients often show persistent or progressive signs of severe HF symptoms corresponding to New York Heart Association class III or IV despite being on optimal medical, surgical, and device therapies. However, a subpopulation of patients with advanced HF, those with the most advanced stages of disease, were often insufficiently represented in the major trials demonstrating efficacy and tolerability of the drugs used in HFrEF due to exclusion criteria such as low BP and kidney dysfunction. Consequently, the results of many landmark trials cannot necessarily be transferred to patients with the most advanced stages of HFrEF. Thus, the efficacy and tolerability of guideline-directed medical therapies in patients with the most advanced stages of HFrEF often remain unsettled, and this knowledge is of crucial importance in the planning and timing of consideration for referral for advanced therapies. This review discusses the evidence regarding the use of contemporary drugs in the advanced HFrEF population, covering components such as guideline HFrEF drugs, diuretics, inotropes, and the use of HFrEF drugs in LVAD recipients, and provides suggestions on how to manage guideline-directed therapy in this patient group. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Galicia Clínica is the property of Sociedad Gallega de Medicina Interna and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Levosimendan exerts positive inotropic and vasodilatory effects. Currently, its effects on right heart function remain uncertain. This systematic review and meta-analysis is intended to illustrate the impacts of levosimendan on systolic function of the right heart in patients with heart dysfunction. We systematically searched electronic databases (PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase and Web of Science) up to November 30, 2020, and filtered eligible studies that reported the impacts of levosimendan on right heart function. Of these, only studies whose patients suffered from heart dysfunction or pulmonary hypertension were included. Additionally, patients were divided into two groups (given levosimendan or not) in the initial research. Then, RevMan5.3 was used to conduct further analysis. A total of 8 studies comprising 390 patients were included. The results showed that after 24 h of levosimendan, patients' right ventricular fractional area change [3.17, 95% CI (2.03, 4.32), P < 0.00001], tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion [1.26, 95% CI (0.35, 2.16), P = 0.007] and tricuspid annular peak systolic velocity [0.86, 95% CI (0.41, 1.32), P = 0.0002] were significantly increased compared to the control group. And there is an increasing trend of cardiac output in levosimendan group [1.06, 95% CI (− 0.16, 2.29), P = 0.09 ].Furthermore, patients' systolic pulmonary arterial pressure [− 5.57, 95% CI (− 7.60, − 3.54), P < 0.00001] and mean pulmonary arterial pressure [− 1.01, 95% CI (− 1.64, − 0.37), P = 0.002] were both significantly decreased, whereas changes in pulmonary vascular resistance [− 55.88, 95% CI (− 206.57, 94.82), P = 0.47] were not significant. Our study shows that in patients with heart dysfunction, levosimendan improves systolic function of the right heart and decreases the pressure of the pulmonary artery. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: The aim of the LAICA study was to evaluate the long‐term effectiveness and safety of intermittent levosimendan infusion in patients with advanced heart failure (AdHF). Methods and results: This was a multicentre, randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled clinical trial of intermittent levosimendan 0.1 μg/kg/min as a continuous 24‐h intravenous infusion administered once monthly for 1 year in patients with AdHF. The primary endpoint [incidence of rehospitalization (admission to the emergency department or hospital ward for >12 h) for acute decompensated HF or clinical deterioration of the underlying HF] occurred in 23/70 (33%) of the levosimendan group (Group I) and 12/27 (44%) of the placebo group (Group II) (P = 0.286). The incidence of hospital readmissions for acute decompensated HF (Group I vs. Group II) at 1, 3, 6, and 12 months was 4.2% vs. 18.2% (P = 0.036); 12.8% vs. 33.3% (P = 0.02); 25.7% vs. 40.7% (P = 0.147); 32.8% vs. 44.4% (P = 0.28), respectively. In a secondary pre‐specified time‐to‐event analysis no differences were observed in admission for acute decompensated HF between patients treated with levosimendan compared with placebo (hazard ratio 0.66; 95% CI, 0.32–1.32; P = 0.24). Cumulative incidence for the aggregated endpoint of acute decompensation of HF and/or death at 1 and 3 months were significatively lower in the levosimendan group than in placebo group [5.7% vs. 25.9% (P = 0.004) and 17.1% vs. 48.1% (P = 0.001), respectively], but not at 6 and 12 months [34.2% vs. 59.2% (P = 0.025); 41.4% vs. 66.6% (P = 0.022), respectively]. Survival probability was significantly higher in patients who received levosimendan compared with those who received placebo (log rank: 4.06; P = 0.044). There were no clinically relevant differences in tolerability between levosimendan and placebo and no new safety signals were observed. Conclusions: In our study, intermittent levosimendan in patients with AdHF produced a statistically non‐significant reduction in the incidence of hospital readmissions for acute decompensated HF, a significantly lower cumulative incidence of acute decompensation of HF and/or death at 1 and 3 month of treatment and a significant improvement in survival during 12 months of treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Assessing reversibility of pulmonary vascular changes through vasoreactivity testing (VRT) optimizes end‐stage heart failure patient selection for heart transplant. All efforts should be made to unload the left ventricle and reduce pulmonary vascular resistance to effectively exclude irreversible pulmonary hypertension. Methods and results: We reviewed our centre's cardiac transplant registry database (2009–2017) for VRT and compared haemodynamic responses with 40 ppm inhaled NO (n = 14), 14–17 μg inhaled iloprost (n = 7), and 24 h 0.1 μg/kg/min intravenous levosimendan (n = 14). Response to levosimendan was assessed by repeat right heart catheterization within 72 h. Baseline clinical and haemodynamic features were similar between groups. VRT was well tolerated in all patients. All drugs effectively reduced pulmonary artery pressures and transpulmonary gradient while increasing cardiac index, although levosimendan had a greater impact on cardiac index increase (P = 0.036). Levosimendan was the only drug that reduced pulmonary artery wedge pressure (P = 0.004) and central venous pressures (P < 0.001) and increased both left and right ventricular stroke work indexes (P = 0.020 and P = 0.042, respectively) and cardiac power index (P < 0.001) compared with NO and iloprost. Right ventricular end‐diastolic pressures and central venous pressure were only decreased by levosimendan. The rate of positive responses (≥10 mmHg decrease or final mean pulmonary artery pressure ≤40 mmHg with increased/unaltered cardiac index) was lower with inhaled iloprost (14%) than with either levosimendan or NO (71% and 64%, respectively; P < 0.05). Conclusions: Levosimendan may be a safe and effective alternative for pulmonary hypertension reversibility assessment or a valuable pre‐test medical optimization tool in end‐stage heart failure patient assessment for heart transplantation offering extended haemodynamic benefits. Whether it increases the rate of positive responses or allows a better selection of candidates to heart transplantation remains to be established. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Intravenous inotropic therapy can be used in patients with advanced heart failure, as palliative therapy or as a bridge to cardiac transplantation or mechanical circulatory support, as well as in cardiogenic shock. Their use is limited to increasing cardiac output in low cardiac output states and reducing ventricular filling pressures to alleviate patient symptoms and improve functional class. Many advanced heart failure patients have sinus tachycardia as a compensatory mechanism to maintain cardiac output. However, excessive sinus tachycardia caused by intravenous inotropes can increase myocardial oxygen consumption, decrease coronary perfusion, and at extreme heart rates decrease ventricular filling and stroke volume. The limited available hemodynamic studies support the hypothesis that adding ivabradine, a rate control agent without negative inotropic effect, may blunt inotrope-induced tachycardia and its associated deleterious effects, while optimizing cardiac output by increasing stroke volume. This review analyzes the intriguing pathophysiology of combined intravenous inotropes and ivabradine to optimize the hemodynamic profile of patients in advanced heart failure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. Advanced heart failure (AdvHF) is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Patients with this clinical condition are potential candidates for heart transplantation or mechanical circulatory support. Initially, however, they are usually supported with inotropic drugs. Recent studies have suggested that levosimendan, independently of hemodynamic improvements, may lead to outcome benefits. Objectives. To present clinical experiences concerning the indications, effectiveness, tolerance, and safety of levosimendan in the real-life therapy of patients with decompensated AdvHF in 3 cardiac centers in Poland. Material and methods. This is a prospective, observational, three-center study. Forty-nine patients with AdvHF admitted with decompensation were included (88% men, mean age 58 years, 65% ischemic etiology, left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) in median 20%) and followed up for an early (3 months) and prolonged period (1 year) after infusion of levosimendan. Patients were analyzed in relation to death. Results. Levosimendan therapy was associated with reduced HF symptoms and signs, New York Heart Association (NYHA) class and level of B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) at discharge. Five patients died during hospitalization, a further 10 during the three-month follow-up and 3 died during the next nine-month follow-up. During the three-month follow-up, 22 patients were re-hospitalized due to HF and in the next nine-month follow-up 8 were re-hospitalized. A multivariate analysis indicated the QRS duration at discharge (hazard ratio (HR) = 1.02; 95% confidence interval (95% CI) = 1.003-1.03; p = 0.018), high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) (HR = 1.01; 95% CI = 1.004-1.02; p = 0.002), and simultaneous dobutamine infusion (HR = 6.54; 95% CI = 1.4-30.5; p = 0.017) were independent risk factors for death in the one-year follow-up. There were no side effects leading to the interruption of the levosimendan infusion. Conclusions. The use of levosimendan was safe and associated with clinical improvement and reduction in BNP level in AdvHF patients hospitalized due to HF decompensation, although the mortality and rehospitalization rate during the one-year follow-up remains high. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Heart failure (HF) remains a major cause of mortality, morbidity, and poor quality of life. It is an area of active research. This article is aimed to give an update on recent advances in all aspects of this syndrome. Major changes occurred in drug treatment of HF with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Sacubitril/valsartan is indicated as a substitute to ACEi/ARBs after PARADIGM‐HF (hazard ratio [HR], 0.80; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.73 to 0.87 for sacubitril/valsartan vs. enalapril for the primary endpoint and Wei, Lin and Weissfeld HR 0.79, 95% CI 0.71–0.89 for recurrent events). Its initiation was then shown as safe and potentially useful in recent studies in patients hospitalized for acute HF. More recently, dapagliflozin and prevention of adverse‐outcomes in DAPA‐HF trial showed the beneficial effects of the sodium–glucose transporter type 2 inhibitor dapaglifozin vs. placebo, added to optimal standard therapy [HR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.65 to 0.85;0.74; 95% CI, 0.65 to 0.85 for the primary endpoint]. Trials with other SGLT 2 inhibitors and in other patients, such as those with HF with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) or with recent decompensation, are ongoing. Multiple studies showed the unfavourable prognostic significance of abnormalities in serum potassium levels. Potassium lowering agents may allow initiation and titration of mineralocorticoid antagonists in a larger proportion of patients. Meta‐analyses suggest better outcomes with ferric carboxymaltose in patients with iron deficiency. Drugs effective in HFrEF may be useful also in HF with mid‐range ejection fraction. Better diagnosis and phenotype characterization seem warranted in HF with preserved ejection fraction. These and other burning aspects of HF research are summarized and reviewed in this article. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In 2014, the Heart Failure Association (HFA) of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) founded the first open access journal focusing on heart failure, called ESC Heart Failure (ESC‐HF). In the first 5 years, in ESC‐HF we published more than 450 articles. Through ESC‐HF, the HFA gives room for heart failure research output from around the world. A transfer process from the European Journal of Heart Failure to ESC‐HF has also been installed. As a consequence, in 2018 ESC‐HF received 289 submissions, and published 148 items (acceptance rate 51%). The journal is listed in Scopus since 2014 and on the PubMed website since 2015. In 2019, we received our first impact factor from ISI Web of Knowledge / Thomson‐Reuters, which is 3.407 for 2018. This report reviews which papers get best cited. Not surprisingly, many of the best cited papers are reviews and facts & numbers mini reviews, but original research is also well cited. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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

Hospitalization for acute heart failure (HF) is associated with a substantial morbidity burden and with associated healthcare costs and an increased mortality risk. However, few if any major medical innovations have been witnessed in this area in recent times. Levosimendan is a first‐in‐class calcium sensitizer and potassium channel opener indicated for the management of acute HF. Experience in several clinical studies has indicated that administration of intravenous levosimendan in intermittent cycles may reduce hospitalization and mortality rates in patients with advanced HF; however, none of those trials were designed or powered to give conclusive insights into that possibility. This paper describes the rationale and protocol of LeoDOR (levosimendan infusions for patients with advanced chronic heart failure), a randomized, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled, international, multicentre trial that will explore the efficacy and safety of intermittent levosimendan therapy, in addition to optimized standard therapy, in patients following hospitalization for acute HF. Salient features of LeoDOR include the use of two treatment regimens, in order to evaluate the effects of different schedules and doses of levosimendan during a 12 week treatment phase, and the use of a global rank primary endpoint, in which all patients are ranked across three hierarchical groups ranging from time to death or urgent heart transplantation or implantation of a ventricular assist device to time to rehospitalization and, lastly, time‐averaged proportional change in N‐terminal pro‐brain natriuretic peptide. Secondary endpoints include changes in HF symptoms and functional status at 14 weeks. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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

This article updates the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) 2007 classification of advanced heart failure and describes new diagnostic and treatment options for these patients. Recognizing the patient with advanced heart failure is critical to facilitate timely referral to advanced heart failure centres. Unplanned visits for heart failure decompensation, malignant arrhythmias, co-morbidities, and the 2016 ESC guidelines criteria for the diagnosis of heart failure with preserved ejection fraction are included in this updated definition. Standard treatment is, by definition, insufficient in these patients. Inotropic therapy may be used as a bridge strategy, but it is only a palliative measure when used on its own, because of the lack of outcomes data. Major progress has occurred with short-term mechanical circulatory support devices for immediate management of cardiogenic shock and long-term mechanical circulatory support for either a bridge to transplantation or as destination therapy. Heart transplantation remains the treatment of choice for patients without contraindications. Some patients will not be candidates for advanced heart failure therapies. For these patients, who are often elderly with multiple co-morbidities, management of advanced heart failure to reduce symptoms and improve quality of life should be emphasized. Robust evidence from prospective studies is lacking for most therapies for advanced heart failure. There is an urgent need to develop evidence-based treatment algorithms to prolong life when possible and in accordance with patient preferences, increase life quality, and reduce the burden of hospitalization in this vulnerable patient population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Progress in Modern Biomedicine is the property of Publishing House of Progress in Modern Biomedicine and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Background: Recent clinical trials have shown that pulmonary artery pressure-guided therapy via the CardioMEMS™ system reduces the risk of recurrent hospitalizations in chronic heart failure (HF) patients. The CardioMEMS™ pressure sensor is percutaneously implanted in a branch of the pulmonary artery and allows telemetric pressure monitoring via a receiver. According to the most recent ESC guidelines, this technology has currently a class IIb indication in patients with class III New York Heart Association symptoms and a previous hospitalization for congestive heart failure within the last year, regardless of ejection fraction. Aim of this guided-therapy is multifold, including an early prediction of upcoming decompensation, optimization of patients' therapy and thereby avoidance of hospital admissions. In addition, it can be used during acute decompensation events as a novel tool to direct intra-hospital therapeutic interventions such as inotropes infusion or left ventricular (LV) assist device monitoring, with the aim of achieving an optimal volume status.Case Presentation: We present a case series of three end-stage HF patients with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) who received a CardioMEMS™ device as an aid in their clinical management. The CardioMEMS™ system enabled a closer non-invasive hemodynamic monitoring of these patients and guided the extent of therapeutic interventions. Patients were free from device- or system-related complications. In addition, no pressure-sensor failure was observed. Two patients received a 24-h infusion of the calcium sensitizer levosimendan. One patient showed a refractory acute decompensation and underwent LV assist device (LVAD) implantation as a bridge to cardiac transplantation. Switching a patient with recurrent hospitalizations to the Angiotensin Receptor Neprilysin Inhibitor (ARNI, Sacubitril-Valsartan) on top of the optimal heart failure-therapy improved its subjective condition and hemodynamics, avoiding further hospitalization.Conclusions: Our case series underlines the potential impact of CardioMEMS™ derived data in the daily clinical management of end-stage HF patients. The new concept to combine CardioMEMS™ in the setting of an outpatient levosimendan program as well as a bridge to LVAD-implantation/heart transplantation looks promising but needs further investigations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Progress in Modern Biomedicine is the property of Publishing House of Progress in Modern Biomedicine and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Introduction: The later stages of heart failure are characterized by a steady decline in quality of life. Clinical priorities should be to maintain functional capacity and quality of life. In the absence of sufficient organs for transplantation, options include left ventricular assist devices and inotropic support. Areas covered: We examined data published in the last two decades on the use of inotropes and inodilators in advanced heart failure. Expert commentary: In the literature, use of conventional inotropes, including adrenergic agonists and phosphodiesterase inhibitors, appears to be suboptimal for achieving the clinical priorities of late-stage heart failure. Evidence suggests instead that the calcium-sensitizing inodilator levosimendan, administered intermittently, delivers improvements in functional capacity and quality of life and does so with no adverse impact on life expectancy. At a terminal or near-terminal stage of heart failure, the therapeutic philosophy should shift towards meeting patients' existential priorities rather than traditional heart failure-centric targets. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Intravenous inotropic therapy may be necessary to achieve short-term survival in end-stage heart failure patients with cardiogenic shock or extreme low output and severe organ hypoperfusion. However, mid- or long-term intravenous inotropic therapy is associated with an increased mortality in advanced stage D heart failure patients using β-adrenoceptor agonists (dobutamine) or PDE-3-inhibitors (milrinone). Intermittent levosimendan may evolve as a reasonable therapeutic option. Randomized trials or other meaningful scientific evidence addressing the optimal treatment of exclusively the most threatened subgroup of hospitalized patients with persistent severe organ hypoperfusion are missing, but urgently needed. Despite a lack of other beneficial pharmacological options, the use of long-term intravenous inotropic therapy as a treatment for refractory heart failure or as an obligatory criterion for high urgency (HU) listing of heart transplant candidates with a median waiting time of 66 days in Germany is not based on scientific evidence. In addition, it might create a disincentive to achieve the HU status as well as keeping it, thereby potentially exposing the patient to an unnecessary additional risk. Upcoming new allocation algorithms may possibly help to improve the inadequate present situation. There is need for both, a better definition and a better treatment of high risk terminal heart failure requiring high urgent transplant listing. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Myocardial contractility and relaxation are highly dependent on calcium homeostasis. Immature myocardium, as in pediatric patients, is thought to be more dependent on extracellular calcium for optimal function. For this reason, intravenous calcium chloride infusions may improve myocardial function in the pediatric patient. The objectives of this study were to report the hemodynamic changes seen after administration of continuous calcium chloride to critically ill children. We retrospectively identified pediatric patients (newborn to 17 years old) with hemodynamic instability admitted to the cardiac ICU between May 2011 and May 2012 who received a continuous infusion of calcium chloride. The primary outcome was improvement in cardiac output, assessed by arterial-mixed venous oxygen saturation (A-V) difference. Sixty-eight patients, mean age 0.87 ± 2.67 years, received a total of 116 calcium infusions. Calcium chloride infusions resulted in significant improvements in primary and secondary measures of cardiac output at 2 and 6 h. Six hours after calcium initiation, A-V oxygen saturation difference decreased by 7.4 % (32.6 ± 2.1 to 25.2 ± 2.0 %, p < 0.001), rSO2 increased by 5.5 % (63.1 vs 68.6 %, p < 0.001), and serum lactate decreased by 0.9 mmol/l (3.3 vs 2.4 mmol/l, p < 0.001) with no change in HR (149.1 vs 145.6 bpm p = 0.07). Urine output increased 0.66 ml/kg/h in the 8-h period after calcium initiation when compared to pre-initiation ( p = 0.003). Neonates had the strongest evidence of effectiveness with other age groups trending toward significance. Calcium chloride infusions improve markers of cardiac output in a heterogenous group of pediatric patients in a cardiac ICU. Neonates appear to derive the most benefit from utilization of these infusions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: Currently, more than 900 patients with end-stage heart failure are listed for heart transplantation in Germany. All patients on the Eurotransplant high-urgent status (HU) have to be treated in intensive care units and have to be relisted every 8 weeks. Long-term continuous inotropes are associated with tachyphylaxia, arrhythmias and even increased mortality. In this retrospective analysis, we report our single center experience with HU patients treated with intermittent inotropes as a bridging therapy. Methods and results: 117 consecutive adult HU candidates were treated at our intensive care heart failure unit between 2008 and 2013, of whom 14 patients (12 %) were stabilized and delisted during follow-up. In the remaining 103 patients (age 42 ± 15 years), different inotropes (dobutamine, milrinone, adrenaline, noradrenaline, levosimendan) were administered based on the patient's specific characteristics. After initial recompensation, patients were weaned from inotropes as soon as possible. Thereafter, intermittent inotropes (over 3-4 days) were given as a predefined weekly (until 2011) or 8 weekly regimen (from 2011 to 2013). In 57 % of these patients, additional regimen-independent inotropic support was necessary due to hemodynamic instabilities. Fourteen patients (14 %) needed a left- or biventricular assist device; 14 patients (14 %) died while waiting and 87 (84 %) received heart transplants after 87 ± 91 days. Cumulative 3 and 12 months survival of all 103 patients was 75 and 67 %, respectively. Conclusion: Intermittent inotropes in HU patients are an adequate strategy as a bridge to transplant; the necessity for assist devices was low. These data provide the basis for a prospective multicenter trial of intermittent inotropes in patients on the HU waiting list. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims: Standard inotropic treatment is often necessary in end-stage heart failure but may be harmful. We performed a meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials to investigate the effect of repeated administration of levosimendan on survival in patients with chronic heart failure. Methods and results: Four investigators independently searched in CENTRAL, Google Scholar MEDLINE/PubMed, Scopus and the Cochrane Central Register of clinical trials to identify any randomized study ever performed with intermittent levosimendan intravenous administration in adult patients with chronic heart failure with no restrictions on dose or time of administration. Data from a total of 326 patients from six randomized controlled studies using intermittent levosimendan in a cardiological setting were included in the analysis. Levosimendan was associated with a significant reduction in mortality at the longest follow-up available [32 of 168 (19 %) in the levosimendan group 46 of 133 (35 %) in the control arm, RR = 0.55 (95 % CI 0.37-0.84), p for effect = 0 0.005, p for heterogeneity = 0.3, I = 23.4 %, NNT = 6 with 5 studies included]. Brain natriuretic peptide values, ejection fraction and number of patients with New York Heart Association ≥III status were similar in survivors of both groups. Conclusions: A large randomized trial is necessary to confirm the promising beneficial effects of intermittent levosimendan administration on the mid-term survival of patients with chronic heart failure. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]