Effects of combined arginine vasopressin and levosimendan on organ function in ovine septic shock

Hemodynamic impacts of apelin-13 in a neonatal lamb model of septic peritonitis

BACKGROUND

Apelins are potential candidate therapeutic molecules for hemodynamic support. The objective of this study was to assess the hemodynamic impacts of apelin-13 in a neonatal lamb model of septic shock.

METHODS

Lambs were randomized to receive apelin-13 or normal saline. Septic shock was induced by injecting a fecal slurry into the peritoneal cavity. Lambs underwent volume repletion (30 mL/kg over 1 h) followed by intravenous administration of 5 incremental doses (D) of apelin-13 (D1 = 0.039 to D5 = 19.5 µg/kg/h) or normal saline.

RESULTS

Following fecal injection, mean arterial pressure (MAP) and cardiac index (CI) dropped in both groups (p < 0.05). The MAP decreased non-significantly from D1 to D5 (p = 0.12) in the saline group, while increasing significantly (p = 0.02) in the apelin group (-12 (-17; 12) vs. +15 (6; 23) % (p = 0.012)). Systemic vascular resistances were higher in the apelin-13 group at D5 compared to the saline group (4337 (3239, 5144) vs. 2532 (2286, 3966) mmHg/min/mL, respectively, p = 0.046). The CI increased non-significantly in the apelin-13 group.

CONCLUSION

Apelin-13 increased MAP in a neonatal lamb septic shock model.

IMPACT

Administration of apelin-13 stabilized hemodynamics during the progression of the sepsis induced in this neonatal lamb model. Systemic vascular resistances were higher in the apelin-13 group than in the placebo group. This suggests ontogenic differences in vascular response to apelin-13 and warrants further investigation. This study suggests that apelin-13 could eventually become a candidate for the treatment of neonatal septic shock.

The role of nitric oxide in sepsis-associated kidney injury

Sepsis is one of the leading causes of acute kidney injury (AKI), and several mechanisms including microcirculatory alterations, oxidative stress, and endothelial cell dysfunction are involved. Nitric oxide (NO) is one of the common elements to all these mechanisms. Although all three nitric oxide synthase (NOS) isoforms are constitutively expressed within the kidneys, they contribute in different ways to nitrergic signaling. While the endothelial (eNOS) and neuronal (nNOS) isoforms are likely to be the main sources of NO under basal conditions and participate in the regulation of renal hemodynamics, the inducible isoform (iNOS) is dramatically increased in conditions such as sepsis. The overexpression of iNOS in the renal cortex causes a shunting of blood to this region, with consequent medullary ischemia in sepsis. Differences in the vascular reactivity among different vascular beds may also help to explain renal failure in this condition. While most of the vessels present vasoplegia and do not respond to vasoconstrictors, renal microcirculation behaves differently from nonrenal vascular beds, displaying similar constrictor responses in control and septic conditions. The selective inhibition of iNOS, without affecting other isoforms, has been described as the ideal scenario. However, iNOS is also constitutively expressed in the kidneys and the NO produced by this isoform is important for immune defense. In this sense, instead of a direct iNOS inhibition, targeting the NO effectors such as guanylate cyclase, potassium channels, peroxynitrite, and S-nitrosothiols, may be a more interesting approach in sepsis-AKI and further investigation is warranted.

Apelin-13 in septic shock: effective in supporting hemodynamics in sheep but compromised by enzymatic breakdown in patients

Sepsis is a prevalent life-threatening condition related to a systemic infection, and with unresolved issues including refractory septic shock and organ failures. Endogenously released catecholamines are often inefficient to maintain blood pressure, and low reactivity to exogenous catecholamines with risk of sympathetic overstimulation is well documented in septic shock. In this context, apelinergics are efficient and safe inotrope and vasoregulator in rodents. However, their utility in a larger animal model as well as the limitations with regards to the enzymatic breakdown during sepsis, need to be investigated. The therapeutic potential and degradation of apelinergics in sepsis were tested experimentally and in a cohort of patients. (1) 36 sheep with or without fecal peritonitis-induced septic shock (a large animal experimental design aimed to mimic the human septic shock paradigm) were evaluated for hemodynamic and renal responsiveness to incremental doses of two dominant apelinergics: apelin-13 (APLN-13) or Elabela (ELA), and (2) 52 subjects (33 patients with sepsis/septic shock and 19 healthy volunteers) were investigated for early levels of endogenous apelinergics in the blood, the related enzymatic degradation profile, and data regarding sepsis outcome. APLN-13 was the only one apelinergic which efficiently improved hemodynamics in both healthy and septic sheep. Endogenous apelinergic levels early rose, and specific enzymatic breakdown activities potentially threatened endogenous apelin system reactivity and negatively impacted the outcome in human sepsis. Short-term exogenous APLN-13 infusion is helpful in stabilizing cardiorenal functions in ovine septic shock; however, this ability might be impaired by specific enzymatic systems triggered during the early time course of human sepsis. Strategies to improve resistance of APLN-13 to degradation and/or to overcome sepsis-induced enzymatic breakdown environment should guide future works.

Comprehensive Comparison of the Effect of Inotropes on Cardiorenal Syndrome in Patients with Advanced Heart Failure: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Prevention of cardiorenal syndrome through treatment with inotropic agents remains challenging. This network meta-analysis evaluated the safety and renoprotective effects of inotropes on patients with advanced heart failure (HF) using a frequentist random-effects model. A systematic database search was performed until 31 January 2021, and a total of 37 trials were included. Inconsistency, publication bias, and subgroup analyses were conducted. The levosimendan group exhibited significantly decreased mortality compared with the control (odds ratio (OR): 0.62; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.46-0.84), milrinone (OR: 0.50; 95% CI: 0.30-0.84), and dobutamine (OR: 0.75; 95% CI: 0.57-0.97) groups. In terms of renal protection, levosimendan (standardized mean difference (SMD): 1.67; 95% CI: 1.17-2.18) and dobutamine (SMD: 1.49; 95% CI: 0.87-2.12) more favorably improved the glomerular filtration rate (GFR) than the control treatment did, but they did not significantly reduce the incidence of acute kidney injury. Furthermore, levosimendan had the highest P-score, indicating that it most effectively reduced mortality and improved renal function (e.g., GFR and serum creatinine level), even in patients with renal insufficiency. In conclusion, levosimendan is a safe alternative for protecting renal function on cardiorenal syndrome in patients with advanced HF.

Comprehensive Comparisons among Inotropic Agents on Mortality and Risk of Renal Dysfunction in Patients Who Underwent Cardiac Surgery: A Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Several kinds of inotropes have been used in critically ill patients to improve hemodynamics and renal dysfunction after cardiac surgery; however, the treatment strategies for reducing mortality and increasing renal protection in patients who underwent cardiac surgery remain controversial. Therefore, we performed a comprehensive network meta-analysis to overcome the lack of head-to-head comparisons. A systematic database was searched up to 31 December 2020, for randomized controlled trials that compared different inotropes on mortality outcomes and renal protective effects after cardiac surgery. A total of 29 trials were included and a frequentist network meta-analysis was performed. Inconsistency analyses, publication bias, and subgroup analyses were also conducted. Compared with placebo, use of levosimendan significantly decreased the risks of mortality (odds ratio (OR): 0.74; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.56–0.97) and risk of acute renal injury (OR: 0.61; 95% CI: 0.45–0.82), especially in low systolic function patients. Use of levosimendan also ranked the best treatment based on the P-score (90.1%), followed by placebo (64.5%), milrinone (49.6%), dopamine (49.5%), dobutamine (29.1%), and fenoldopam (17.0%). Taking all the available data into consideration, levosimendan was a safe renal-protective choice for the treatment of patients undergoing cardiac surgery, especially for those with low systolic function.

Levosimendan in the modern treatment of patients with acute heart failure of various aetiologies

Acute decompensated heart failure (ADHF) is a common clinical problem associated with a high mortality rate. Because ADHF has various aetiologies, there are a range of therapeutic options, among others, positive inotropes (inotropic drugs). As an inotropic agent whose mechanism is different than that of "classical" medicines, levosimendan (LSM) is one of the most common therapeutic options. Despite many publications on LSM, some issues related to its application remain unclear. The authors of this paper have attempted to summarise expert recommendations and reports available in the literature.

Vasopressor Therapy in the Intensive Care Unit

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

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

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

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

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

Haemodynamic Balance in Acute and Advanced Heart Failure: An Expert Perspective on the Role of Levosimendan

Acute and advanced heart failure are associated with substantial adverse short- and longer-term prognosis. Both conditions necessitate complex treatment choices to restore haemodynamic stability and organ perfusion, relieve congestion, improve symptoms and allow the patient to leave the hospital and achieve an adequate quality of life. Among the available intravenous vasoactive therapies, inotropes constitute an option when an increase in cardiac contractility is needed to reverse a low output state. Within the inotrope category, levosimendan is well suited to the needs of both sets of patients since, in contrast to conventional adrenergic inotropes, it has not been linked in clinical trials or wider clinical usage with increased mortality risk and retains its efficacy in the presence of beta-adrenergic receptor blockade; it is further believed to possess beneficial renal effects. The overall haemodynamic profile and clinical tolerability of levosimendan, combined with its extended duration of action, have encouraged its intermittent use in patients with advanced heart failure. This paper summarises the key messages derived from a series of 12 tutorials held at the Heart Failure 2019 congress organised in Athens, Greece, by the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology.

Preclinical septic shock research: why we need an animal ICU

Animal experiments are widely used in preclinical medical research with the goal of disease modeling and exploration of novel therapeutic approaches. In the context of sepsis and septic shock, the translation into clinical practice has been disappointing. Classical animal models of septic shock usually involve one-sex-one-age animal models, mostly in mice or rats, contrasting with the heterogeneous population of septic shock patients. Many other factors limit the reliability of preclinical models and may contribute to preclinical research failure in critical care, including the host specificity of several pathogens, the fact that laboratory animals are raised in pathogen-free facilities and that organ support techniques are either absent or minimal. Advanced animal models have been developed with the aim of improving the clinical translatability of experimental findings. So-called animal ICUs refer to the preclinical investigation of adult or even aged animals of either sex, using—in case of rats and mice—miniaturized equipment allowing for reproducing an ICU environment at a small animal scale and integrating chronic comorbidities to more closely reflect the clinical conditions studied. Strength and limitations of preclinical animal models designed to decipher the mechanisms involved in septic cardiomyopathy are discussed. This article reviews the current status and the challenges of setting up an animal ICU.

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

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

Beneficial effects of levosimendan on survival in patients undergoing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation after cardiovascular surgery

BACKGROUND

The impact of levosimendan treatment on clinical outcome in patients undergoing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) support after cardiovascular surgery is unknown. We hypothesized that the beneficial effects of levosimendan might improve survival when adequate end-organ perfusion is ensured by concomitant ECMO therapy. We therefore studied the impact of levosimendan treatment on survival and failure of ECMO weaning in patients after cardiovascular surgery.

METHODS

We enrolled a total of 240 patients undergoing veno-arterial ECMO therapy after cardiovascular surgery at a university-affiliated tertiary care centre into our observational single-centre registry.

RESULTS

During a median follow-up period of 37 months (interquartile range 19-67 months), 65% of patients died. Seventy-five per cent of patients received levosimendan treatment within the first 24 h after initiation of ECMO therapy. Cox regression analysis showed an association between levosimendan treatment and successful ECMO weaning [adjusted hazard ratio (HR) 0.41; 95% confience interval (CI) 0.22-0.80; P=0.008], 30 day mortality (adjusted HR 0.52; 95% CI 0.30-0.89; P=0.016), and long-term mortality (adjusted HR 0.64; 95% CI 0.42-0.98; P=0.04).

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest an association between levosimendan treatment and improved short- and long-term survival in patients undergoing ECMO support after cardiovascular surgery.

Vasopressors During Sepsis: Selection and Targets

Clinicians have greatly improved care for septic shock. Urgent resuscitation using intravenous fluids and vasopressors as well as rapid administration of broad spectrum antibiotics are probably the most basic and universally accepted interventions. Various trials have compared different types of vasopressors, associations of vasopressors and inotropes, and pressure targets. End goal-directed therapy algorithms are designed to optimize oxygen delivery by use of fluids, vasopressors, inotropes, and blood products. Patients who have a poor response to resuscitation and patients with known severe ventricular dysfunction might merit advanced hemodynamic monitoring. This review examines important vasopressor and septic shock trials.

Provision of physiological data and reference values in awake and anaesthetized female sheep aged 6-12 months

OBJECTIVE

To provide physiological data and reference values in awake and anaesthetized sheep aged 6-12 months.

STUDY DESIGN

Descriptive study.

ANIMALS

Data from 260 female sheep of the species Ovis orientalis aries aged 6-12 months were extracted from 10 experimental trials.

METHODS

Data from pulmonary arterial thermodilution in awake (cohort 1; n = 109) and anaesthetized animals (cohort 2; n = 81), and transpulmonary thermodilution in anaesthetized animals (cohort 3; n = 70) were analysed. General anaesthesia was induced by intramuscular injection of S-ketamine and midazolam and maintained by inhaled isoflurane. Standard laboratory variables (blood gas and clinical chemistry) were assessed.

RESULTS

A total of 7553 single data entries from 260 healthy sheep were included. Measurement errors or invalid data documentation meant that 313 data entries (4.1%) were excluded. A small confidence interval for median values was calculated for nearly all variables. The median body weight was 39.8 kg (2.5-97.5th percentile 30.6-48.1 kg). A set of reference values (2.5-97.5th percentiles) is provided for common cardiopulmonary and laboratory variables. Compared to awake animals, haemodynamic variables were markedly influenced by anaesthesia, as reflected by a considerably lower stroke volume index in anaesthetized sheep. There were also differences in stroke volume index between the cohorts of pulmonary artery and transpulmonary thermodilution.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

The present work presents a large and consistent database of a variety of physiological variables measured in healthy juvenile female sheep. The data appear to be robust and allow the establishment of standardized inclusion criteria for experimental studies and may help to better evaluate past, present and future research. Differences between pulmonary artery and transpulmonary thermodilution should be assessed in future studies.

Vasoactive agents for the treatment of sepsis

The article describes some commonly used vasoactive agents in patients with septic shock. Depending on their distinct pharmacological properties, their effects on vascular bed and cardiac function are different. For example, dopamine has equivalent effect on heart and vasculature, which can result in increases in cardiac output, mean arterial pressure and heart rate. Dobutamine is considered as inodilator because it has potent effect on cardiac systole and vasculature. Patients with sepsis and septic shock sometimes have coexisting cardiac dysfunction that justifies the use of dobutamine. Levosimendan is a relatively new agent exerting its inodilator effect by increasing sensitivity of myocardium to calcium. Some preliminary studies showed a promising result of levosimendan on reducing mortality.

Non-Adrenergic Vasopressors in Patients with or at Risk for Vasodilatory Shock. A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials

Introduction

Hypotensive state is frequently observed in several critical conditions. If an adequate mean arterial pressure is not promptly restored, insufficient tissue perfusion and organ dysfunction may develop. Fluids and catecholamines are the cornerstone of critical hypotensive states management. Catecholamines side effects such as increased myocardial oxygen consumption and development of arrhythmias are well known. Thus, in recent years, interest in catecholamine-sparing agents such as vasopressin, terlipressin and methylene blue has increased; however, few randomized trials, mostly with small sample sizes, have been performed. We therefore conducted a meta-analysis of randomized trials to investigate the effect of non-catecholaminergic vasopressors on mortality.

Methods

PubMed, BioMed Central and Embase were searched (update December 31^st, 2014) by two independent investigators. Inclusion criteria were: random allocation to treatment, at least one group receiving a non-catecholaminergic vasopressor, patients with or at risk for vasodilatory shock. Exclusion criteria were: crossover studies, pediatric population, non-human studies, studies published as abstract only, lack of data on mortality. Studied drugs were vasopressin, terlipressin and methylene blue. Primary endpoint was mortality at the longest follow-up available.

Results

A total of 1,608 patients from 20 studies were included in our analysis. The studied settings were sepsis (10/20 studies [50%]), cardiac surgery (7/20 [35%]), vasodilatory shock due to any cause (2/20 [19%]), and acute traumatic injury (1/20 [5%]). Overall, pooled estimates showed that treatment with non-catecholaminergic agents improves survival (278/810 [34.3%] versus 309/798 [38.7%], risk ratio = 0.88, 95% confidence interval = 0.79 to 0.98, p = 0.02). None of the drugs was associated with significant reduction in mortality when analyzed independently. Results were not confirmed when analyzing studies with a low risk of bias.

Conclusions

Catecholamine-sparing agents in patients with or at risk for vasodilatory shock may improve survival. Further researches on this topic are needed to confirm the finding.

Early administration of levosimendan is associated with improved kidney function after cardiac surgery - a retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND

Several animal studies suggest beneficial effects on kidney function upon administration of levosimendan. As recent data from clinical studies are heterogeneous, we sought to investigate whether levosimendan is associated with improved postoperative kidney function in cardiac surgery patients with respect to timing of its administration.

METHODS

Retrospective, single centre, observational analysis at a university hospital in Berlin, Germany. All adult patients without preoperative renal dysfunction that underwent coronary artery bypass grafting and/or valve reconstruction/replacement between 01/01/2007 and 31/12/2011 were considered for analyses.

RESULTS

Out of 1.095 included patients, 46 patients were treated with levosimendan due to a severely reduced left ventricular systolic function preoperatively (LVEF < 35%) and/or clinical signs of a low cardiac output syndrome. Sixty-one percent received the drug whilst in the OR, 39% after postoperative intensive care unit admission. When levosimendan was given immediately after anaesthesia induction, creatinine plasma levels (p = 0.009 for nonparametric analysis of longitudinal data in a two-factorial design) and incidence of postoperative renal dysfunction (67.9% vs. 94.4%; p = 0.033) were significantly reduced in contrast to a later start of treatment. In addition, duration of renal replacement therapy was significantly shorter (79 [35;332] vs. 272 [132;703] minutes; p = 0.046) in that group.

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative kidney dysfunction is a common condition in patients under going cardiac surgery. Patients with severely reduced left ventricular function and/or clinical signs of a low cardiac output syndrome who preoperatively presented with a normal kidney function may benefit from an early start of levosimendan administration, i.e. immediately after anaesthesia.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov-ID: NCT01918618 .

An efficacy and mechanism evaluation study of Levosimendan for the Prevention of Acute oRgan Dysfunction in Sepsis (LeoPARDS): protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Organ dysfunction consequent to infection ('severe sepsis') is the leading cause of admission to an intensive care unit (ICU). In both animal models and early clinical studies the calcium channel sensitizer levosimendan has been demonstrated to have potentially beneficial effects on organ function. The aims of the Levosimendan for the Prevention of Acute oRgan Dysfunction in Sepsis (LeoPARDS) trial are to identify whether a 24-hour infusion of levosimendan will improve organ dysfunction in adults who have septic shock and to establish the safety profile of levosimendan in this group of patients.

METHODS/DESIGN

This is a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, parallel group, placebo-controlled trial. Adults fulfilling the criteria for systemic inflammatory response syndrome due to infection, and requiring vasopressor therapy, will be eligible for inclusion in the trial. Within 24 hours of meeting these inclusion criteria, patients will be randomized in a 1:1 ratio stratified by the ICU to receive either levosimendan (0.05 to 0.2 μg.kg⁻¹.min⁻¹ or placebo for 24 hours in addition to standard care. The primary outcome measure is the mean Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) score while in the ICU. Secondary outcomes include: central venous oxygen saturations and cardiac output; incidence and severity of renal failure using the Acute Kidney Injury Network criteria; duration of renal replacement therapy; serum bilirubin; time to liberation from mechanical ventilation; 28-day, hospital, 3 and 6 month survival; ICU and hospital length-of-stay; and days free from catecholamine therapy. Blood and urine samples will be collected on the day of inclusion, at 24 hours, and on days 4 and 6 post-inclusion for investigation of the mechanisms by which levosimendan might improve organ function. Eighty patients will have additional blood samples taken to measure levels of levosimendan and its active metabolites OR-1896 and OR-1855. A total of 516 patients will be recruited from approximately 25 ICUs in the United Kingdom.

DISCUSSION

This trial will test the efficacy of levosimendan to reduce acute organ dysfunction in adult patients who have septic shock and evaluate its biological mechanisms of action.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current controlled trials ISRCTN12776039 (19 September 2013).

Inotropic Support in the Treatment of Septic Myocardial Dysfunction: Pathophysiological Implications Supporting the Use of Levosimendan

Myocardial dysfunction is a frequent organ manifestation during septic shock and the subsequent impairment in cardiac output may result in organ hypoperfusion, requiring prompt and adequate treatment to restore cardiovascular function and reverse shock [1]. Current sepsis guidelines recommend resuscitation with intravascular fluid administration in association with inotropes and vasopressors to maintain organ perfusion [2]. Dobutamine is recommended as first-line inotropic agent and should be administered when low cardiac output or signs of hypoperfusion persist after adequate fluid resuscitation and perfusion pressure have been achieved [2]. However, the efficacy of dobutamine in patients with heart failure has not been fully demonstrated and concerns on its use are still present [3]. Although dobutamine improves perfusion and increases oxygen delivery (DO₂), its impact on survival in septic shock patients is limited, with guideline recommendations based mainly on the landmark study by Rivers et al. [4]. Recently, Wilkman et al. [5] reported that the use of inotropes, particularly dobutamine, in septic shock was associated with increased 90-day mortality. In explaining the lack of outcome benefit [3, 5], several aspects need to be taken into account. First, the need of inotropic support may simply represent an expression of disease severity rather than the cause of a poor outcome. Second, whereas the treatment of impaired cardiac output should be tailored based on the etiological mechanism of the cardiovascular dysfunction, the current guidelines recommend the use of inotropes without differentiating the underlying causes of impaired left ventricular (LV) stroke volume [2, 6]. In addition, the majority of cardiovascular monitoring instruments provide data almost exclusively on cardiac output and pressures. This approach may potentially increase the number of patients who may be harmed by inotrope administration (Fig. 1). Finally, the beneficial short-term effect of enhanced contractility by cAMP-increasing drugs (e. g., dobutamine, milrinone) is, at least partly, abolished by the increased energy consumption, the worsening of ventricular relaxation and the direct cardiomyocyte toxicity [1, 7–10].

Renal effects of levosimendan: a consensus report

Renal dysfunction is common in clinical settings in which cardiac function is compromised such as heart failure, cardiac surgery or sepsis, and is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Levosimendan is a calcium sensitizer and potassium channel opener used in the treatment of acute heart failure. This review describes the effects of the inodilator levosimendan on renal function. A panel of 25 scientists and clinicians from 15 European countries (Austria, Finland, France, Hungary, Germany, Greece, Italy, Portugal, the Netherlands, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and Ukraine) convened and reached a consensus on the current interpretation of the renal effects of levosimendan described both in non-clinical research and in clinical study reports. Most reports on the effect of levosimendan indicate an improvement of renal function in heart failure, sepsis and cardiac surgery settings. However, caution should be applied as study designs differed from randomized, controlled studies to uncontrolled ones. Importantly, in the largest HF study (REVIVE I and II) no significant changes in the renal function were detected. As it regards the mechanism of action, the opening of mitochondrial KATP channels by levosimendan is involved through a preconditioning effect. There is a strong rationale for randomized controlled trials seeking beneficial renal effects of levosimendan. As an example, a study is shortly to commence to assess the role of levosimendan for the prevention of acute organ dysfunction in sepsis (LeoPARDS).

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

Although international guidelines for hemodynamic support of pediatric septic shock suggest considering the potent calcium sensitizer inodilator levosimendan as a second-line inotropic agent to treat cold hypodynamic shock resistant to catecholamines, clinical experience in septic infants is lacking. We report the beneficial effects of levosimendan infusion in 2 infants (39 and 64 days old) with low cardiac output septic shock (ejection fraction, 29% and 33%; fractional shortening, 10% and 16% respectively) refractory to volume replacement and to the catecholamines dopamine and dobutamine. Levosimendan infusion (0.15 µg/kg/min) promptly increased both patients' myocardial contractility and improved tissue perfusion, thereby reducing lactate levels and increasing urine output. The only adverse effect was moderate hypotension in one infant, who reversed by adding norepinephrine to levosimendan. This clinical experience confirms the potential beneficial effects of levosimendan infusion to restore hemodynamics in infants with low cardiac output septic shock resistant to catecholamines.

Experimental sepsis in pigs--effects of vasopressin on renal, hepatic, and intestinal dysfunction

INTRODUCTION

Low-dose arginine vasopressin (AVP) has been proposed as an adjunctive vasopressor for the treatment of advanced vasodilatory shock. However, its effects on renal, hepatic, and intestinal dysfunction during sepsis remain controversial.

METHODS

Fecal peritonitis was induced in 20 anesthetized, invasively monitored, mechanically ventilated female pigs. Following the time point of septic shock (defined as mean artery pressure (MAP) ≤65 mmHg), animals were randomly assigned to the following groups (n = 10): 1) a norepinephrine group with MAP between 65 and 75 mmHg; and 2) an AVP group with a constant infusion rate of 0.5 mU.kg(-1).min(-1).

RESULTS

MAP, pulmonary capillary wedge pressure, hematocrit, TNF-α, IL-6, and IL-10 were similar in the two groups during the 28-h observation period. Infusion of AVP was associated with lower total norepinephrine and fluid requirements. There was a statistically significant improvement in renal function as assessed by increased urine output and renal blood flow, and decreased serum creatinine, in the AVP group when compared with the norepinephrine group (P < 0.05). Histological analyses of the intestine, liver, and kidney showed similar light microscopical appearance of the two groups. Apoptotic cells in the liver were significantly fewer in the AVP group when compared with the norepinephrine group (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

An adjunctive AVP to norepinephrine infusion exhibits a favorable impact on renal function without deleterious effects on the liver and intestine in a porcine model of experimental sepsis when compared with norepinephrine infusion alone.

Pharmacological targets in the renal peritubular microenvironment: implications for therapy for sepsis-induced acute kidney injury

One of the most frequent and serious complications to develop in septic patients is acute kidney injury (AKI), a disorder characterized by a rapid failure of the kidneys to adequately filter the blood, regulate ion and water balance, and generate urine. AKI greatly worsens the already poor prognosis of sepsis and increases cost of care. To date, therapies have been mostly supportive; consequently there has been little change in the mortality rates over the last decade. This is due, at least in part, to the delay in establishing clinical evidence of an infection and the associated presence of the systemic inflammatory response syndrome and thus, a delay in initiating therapy. A second reason is a lack of understanding regarding the mechanisms leading to renal injury, which has hindered the development of more targeted therapies. In this review, we summarize recent studies, which have examined the development of renal injury during sepsis and propose how changes in the peritubular capillary microenvironment lead to and then perpetuate microcirculatory failure and tubular epithelial cell injury. We also discuss a number of potential therapeutic targets in the renal peritubular microenvironment, which may prevent or lessen injury and/or promote recovery.

Current management of sepsis in critically ill adult patients

Severe sepsis is a common occurrence in critically ill patients and a major cause of morbidity and mortality in this population. Management relies on the early identification and treatment of the underlying causative infection, adequate and rapid hemodynamic resuscitation, support of associated organ failure and modulation of the immune response with drotrecogin alfa (activated) when it is not contraindicated, and corticosteroids in severe septic shock. We will review current approaches to each of these categories.

Bench-to-bedside review: Vasopressin in the management of septic shock

This review of vasopressin in septic shock differs from previous reviews by providing more information on the physiology and pathophysiology of vasopressin and vasopressin receptors, particularly because of recent interest in more specific AVPR1a agonists and new information from the Vasopressin and Septic Shock Trial (VASST), a randomized trial of vasopressin versus norepinephrine in septic shock. Relevant literature regarding vasopressin and other AVPR1a agonists was reviewed and synthesized. Vasopressin, a key stress hormone in response to hypotension, stimulates a family of receptors: AVPR1a, AVPR1b, AVPR2, oxytocin receptors and purinergic receptors. Rationales for use of vasopressin in septic shock are as follows: first, a deficiency of vasopressin in septic shock; second, low-dose vasopressin infusion improves blood pressure, decreases requirements for norepinephrine and improves renal function; and third, a recent randomized, controlled, concealed trial of vasopressin versus norepinephrine (VASST) suggests low-dose vasopressin may decrease mortality of less severe septic shock. Previous clinical studies of vasopressin in septic shock were small or not controlled. There was no difference in 28-day mortality between vasopressin-treated versus norepinephrine-treated patients (35% versus 39%, respectively) in VASST. There was potential benefit in the prospectively defined stratum of patients with less severe septic shock (5 to 14 μg/minute norepinephrine at randomization): vasopressin may have lowered mortality compared with norepinephrine (26% versus 36%, respectively, P = 0.04 within stratum). The result was robust: vasopressin also decreased mortality (compared with norepinephrine) if less severe septic shock was defined by the lowest quartile of arterial lactate or by use of one (versus more than one) vasopressor at baseline. Other investigators found greater hemodynamic effects of higher dose of vasopressin (0.06 units/minute) but also unique adverse effects (elevated liver enzymes and serum bilirubin). Use of higher dose vasopressin requires further evaluation of efficacy and safety. There are very few studies of interactions of therapies in critical care - or septic shock - and effects on mortality. Therefore, the interaction of vasopressin infusion, corticosteroid treatment and mortality of septic shock was evaluated in VASST. Low-dose vasopressin infusion plus corticosteroids significantly decreased 28-day mortality compared with corticosteroids plus norepinephrine (44% versus 35%, respectively, P = 0.03; P = 0.008 interaction statistic). Prospective randomized controlled trials would be necessary to confirm this interesting interaction. In conclusion, low-dose vasopressin may be effective in patients who have less severe septic shock already receiving norepinephrine (such as patients with modest norepinephrine infusion (5 to 15 μg/minute) or low serum lactate levels). The interaction of vasopressin infusion and corticosteroid treatment in septic shock requires further study.

Levosimendan for resuscitating the microcirculation in patients with septic shock: a randomized controlled study

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of the present study was to investigate microcirculatory blood flow in patients with septic shock treated with levosimendan as compared to an active comparator drug (i.e. dobutamine). The primary end point was a difference of ≥ 20% in the microvascular flow index of small vessels (MFIs) among groups.

METHODS

The study was designed as a prospective, randomized, double-blind clinical trial and performed in a multidisciplinary intensive care unit. After achieving normovolemia and a mean arterial pressure of at least 65 mmHg, 40 septic shock patients were randomized to receive either levosimendan 0.2 μg·kg(-1)·min(-1) (n = 20) or an active comparator (dobutamine 5 μg·kg(-1)·min(-1); control; n = 20) for 24 hours. Sublingual microcirculatory blood flow of small and medium vessels was assessed by sidestream dark-field imaging. Microcirculatory variables and data from right heart catheterization were obtained at baseline and 24 hours after randomization. Baseline and demographic data were compared by means of Mann-Whitney rank sum test or chi-square test, as appropriate. Microvascular and hemodynamic variables were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney rank sum test.

RESULTS

Microcirculatory flow indices of small and medium vessels increased over time and were significantly higher in the levosimendan group as compared to the control group (24 hrs: MFIm 3.0 (3.0; 3.0) vs. 2.9 (2.8; 3.0); P = .02; MFIs 2.9 (2.9; 3.0) vs. 2.7 (2.3; 2.8); P < .001). The relative increase of perfused vessel density vs. baseline was significantly higher in the levosimendan group than in the control group (dMFIm 10 (3; 23)% vs. 0 (-1; 9)%; P = .007; dMFIs 47 (26; 83)% vs. 10 (-3; 27); P < .001). In addition, the heterogeneity index decreased only in the levosimendan group (dHI -93 (-100; -84)% vs. 0 (-78; 57)%; P < .001). There was no statistically significant correlation between systemic and microcirculatory flow variables within each group (each P > .05).

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to a standard dose of 5 μg·kg(-1)·min(-1) of dobutamine, levosimendan at 0.2 μg·kg(-1)·min(-1) improved sublingual microcirculatory blood flow in patients with septic shock, as reflected by changes in microcirculatory flow indices of small and medium vessels.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT00800306.