Levosimendan versus milrinone in neonates and infants after corrective open-heart surgery: a pilot study

Comparison of Levosimendan Versus Milrinone After the Arterial Switch Operation for Infants ≤3 kg

Background: Various inotropes and inodilators have been utilized to treat low cardiac output syndrome after the arterial switch operation. The use of levosimendan, a calcium sensitizer has been limited in this setting. This study compares the effects of levosimendan with milrinone in managing low cardiac output after the arterial switch operation. Methods: A retrospective, comparative study was conducted in a tertiary care hospital on patients weighing up to 3 kg undergoing the arterial switch operation between January 2017 and January 2022. Patients received a loading dose followed by continuous infusion of either levosimendan or milrinone. Echocardiographic, hemodynamic and biochemical parameters were compared. Results: Forty-three patients received levosimendan and 42 patients received milrinone as the primary test drug. Cardiac index of less than 2.2 L/min/m2 on postoperative day 1 and 2 was found in 9.3% and 2.3% of patients receiving levosimendan versus 26.2% and 11.9% in those receiving milrinone, respectively (P = .04 and .08, respectively). Early lactate-clearance and better central venous oxygen saturations were noted in the levosimendan group. Prevalence of acute kidney injury was higher in the milrinone group (50% vs 28%; P = .03). Use of peritoneal dialysis in the milrinone group versus levosimendan was 31% and 16.3%, respectively (P = .11). There was no difference in hospital mortality between the groups (milrinone, 3; levosimendan, 2, P = .62). Conclusions: Levosimendan is safe and as effective as milrinone to treat low cardiac output syndrome occurring in neonates after the arterial switch operation. In addition we found that levosimendan was renal protective when compared with milrinone.

An Update on Pharmacologic Management of Neonatal Hypotension: When, Why, and Which Medication

Anti-hypotensive treatment, which includes dopamine, dobutamine, epinephrine, norepinephrine, milrinone, vasopressin, terlipressin, levosimendan, and glucocorticoids, is a long-established intervention in neonates with arterial hypotension (AH). However, there are still gaps in knowledge and issues that need clarification. The main questions and challenges that neonatologists face relate to the reference ranges of arterial blood pressure in presumably healthy neonates in relation to gestational and postnatal age; the arterial blood pressure level that potentially affects perfusion of critical organs; the incorporation of targeted echocardiography and near-infrared spectroscopy for assessing heart function and cerebral perfusion in clinical practice; the indication, timing, and choice of medication for each individual patient; the limited randomized clinical trials in neonates with sometimes conflicting results; and the sparse data regarding the potential effect of early hypotension or anti-hypotensive medications on long-term neurodevelopment. In this review, after a short review of AH definitions used in neonates and existing data on pathophysiology of AH, we discuss currently available data on pharmacokinetic and hemodynamic effects, as well as the effectiveness and safety of anti-hypotensive medications in neonates. In addition, data on the comparisons between anti-hypotensive medications and current suggestions for the main indications of each medication are discussed.

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

BACKGROUND

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

Reassessing the role of milrinone in the treatment of heart failure and pulmonary hypertension in neonates and children: a systematic review and meta-analysis

To evaluate milrinone's impact on pediatric cardiac function, focusing on its specific role as an inotrope and lusitrope, while considering its systemic and pulmonary vasodilatory effects. Search of PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Library up to August 2023. We included all studies that evaluated milrinone in children under 18 years old in neonatal, pediatric, or cardiac intensive care units. We excluded case reports, studies that did not provide tabular information on milrinone's outcomes, and studies focused on non-intensive care populations. We extracted data on the research design, objectives, study sample, and results of each study, including the impact of milrinone and any associated factors. We screened a total of 9423 abstracts and 41 studies were ultimately included. Milrinone significantly improved left ventricular ejection fraction (WMD 3.41 [95% CI 0.61 - 6.21]), left ventricle shortening fraction (WMD 4.25 [95% CI 3.43 - 5.08]), cardiac index (WMD 0.50 [95% CI 0.32 to 0.68]), left ventricle output (WMD 55.81 [95% CI 4.91 to 106.72]), serum lactate (WMD -0.59 [95% CI -1.15 to -0.02]), and stroke volume index (WMD 2.95 [95% CI 0.09 - 5.82]). However, milrinone was not associated with improvements in ventricular myocardial performance index (WMD -0.01 [95% CI -0.06 to 0.04]) and ventricular longitudinal strain (WMD -2.14 [95% CI -4.56 to 0.28]). Furthermore, milrinone was not associated with isovolumetric relaxation time reduction (WMD -8.87 [95% CI -21.40 to 3.66]).

CONCLUSION

Our meta-analysis suggests potential clinical benefits of milrinone by improving cardiac function, likely driven by its systemic vasodilatory effects. However, questions arise about its inotropic influence and the presence of a lusitropic effect. Moreover, milrinone's pulmonary vasodilatory effect appears relatively weaker compared to its systemic actions. Further research is needed to elucidate milrinone's precise mechanisms and refine its clinical applications in pediatric practice.

WHAT IS KNOWN

• Milrinone is a phosphodiesterase III inhibitor that has been used to treat a variety of pediatric and neonatal conditions. • Milrinone is believed to exert its therapeutic effects by enhancing cardiac contractility and promoting vascular relaxation.

WHAT IS NEW

• Milrinone may not have a significant inotropic effect. • Milrinone's pulmonary vasodilatory effect is less robust than its systemic vasodilatory effect.

Use of levosimendan in hemodynamic management of heart failure in two neonates with intracranial arteriovenous shunts: a case series

BACKGROUND

The hemodynamic status of newborns with intracranial arteriovenous shunts (AVSs) may be extremely complex. Mini-invasive hemodynamic monitoring through innovative techniques such as Near-Infrared Spectroscopy (NIRS) and Pressure Recording Analytical Method (PRAM) may help in understanding hemodynamics in newborns with AVSs. Levosimendan is a calcium sensitizer and inodilator, and it is known to improve ventricular function, but its use in newborns is limited. In our cases, we evaluated the effect of levosimendan on hemodynamics through NIRS and PRAM.

CASE PRESENTATION

Herein, we report the cases of two neonates with intracranial arteriovenous shunts, in whom we used levosimendan to manage cardiac failure refractory to conventional treatment. Levosimendan was used at a dosage of 0.1 mcg/kg/min for 72 h. Combined use of NIRS and PRAM helped in real-time monitoring of hemodynamic effects; in particular, levosimendan determined significant improvement in myocardium contractility as well as a reduction of heart rate.

CONCLUSION

In two neonatal cases of AVSs, levosimendan led to an overall hemodynamic stabilization, documented by the combination of NIRS and PRAM. Our results suggest introducing levosimendan as a second-line treatment in cases of severe cardiac dysfunction due to AVSs without improvement using standard treatment strategies. Future prospective and larger studies are highly warranted.

Therapeutic Approaches in Heart Failure with Preserved Ejection Fraction (HFpEF) in Children: Present and Future

For a long time, pediatric heart failure (HF) with preserved systolic function (HFpEF) has been noted in patients with cardiomyopathies and congenital heart disease. HFpEF is infrequently reported in children and instead of using the  HFpEF terminology the HF symptoms are attributed to diastolic dysfunction. Identifying HFpEF in children is challenging because of heterogeneous etiologies and unknown pathophysiological mechanisms. Advances in echocardiography and cardiac magnetic resonance imaging techniques have further increased our understanding of HFpEF in children. However, the literature does not describe the incidence, etiology, clinical features, and treatment of HFpEF in children. At present, treatment of HFpEF in children is extrapolated from clinical trials in adults. There are significant differences between pediatric and adult HF with reduced ejection fraction, supported by a lack of adequate response to adult HF therapies. Evidence-based clinical trials in children are still not available because of the difficulty of conducting trials with a limited number of pediatric patients with HF. The treatment of HFpEF in children is based upon the clinician's experience, and the majority of children receive off-level medications. There are significant differences between pediatric and adult HFpEF pharmacotherapies in many areas, including side-effect profiles, underlying pathophysiologies, the β-receptor physiology, and pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. This review describes the present and future treatments for children with HFpEF compared with adults. This review also highlights the need to urgently test new therapies in children with HFpEF to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of drugs and devices with proven benefits in adults.

A new physiologic-based integrated algorithm in the management of neonatal hemodynamic instability

Physiologic-based management of hemodynamic instability is proven to guide the logical selection of cardiovascular support and shorten the time to clinical recovery compared to an empiric approach that ignores the heterogeneity of the hemodynamic instability related mechanisms. In this report, we classified neonatal hemodynamic instability, circulatory shock, and degree of compensation into five physiologic categories, based on different phenotypes of blood pressure (BP), other clinical parameters, echocardiography markers, and oxygen indices. This approach is focused on hemodynamic instability in infants with normal cardiac anatomy.Conclusion: The management of hemodynamic instability is challenging due to the complexity of the pathophysiology; integrating different monitoring techniques is essential to understand the underlying pathophysiologic mechanisms and formulate a physiologic-based medical recommendation and approach. What is Known: • Physiologic-based assessment of hemodynamics leads to targeted and pathophysiologic-based medical recommendations. What is New: • Hemodynamic instability in neonates can be categorized according to the underlying mechanism into five main categories, based on blood pressure phenotypes, systemic vascular resistance, and myocardial performance. • The new classification helps with the targeted management and logical selection of cardiovascular support.

Drug Treatment of Heart Failure in Children: Gaps and Opportunities

Medical therapy for pediatric heart failure is based on a detailed mechanistic understanding of the underlying causes, which are diverse and unlike those encountered in most adult patients. Diuresis and improved perfusion are the immediate goals of care in the child with acute decompensated heart failure. Conversion to maintenance oral therapy for heart failure is based on the results of landmark studies in adults, as well as recent pediatric clinical trials and heart failure guidelines. There will continue to be an important role for newer drugs, some of which are in active trials in adults, and some of which are already approved for use in children. The need to plan for clinical trials in children during drug development for heart failure is emphasized.

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

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

Levosimendan Versus Milrinone and Release of Myocardial Biomarkers After Pediatric Cardiac Surgery: Post Hoc Analysis of Clinical Trial Data

OBJECTIVES

We compared the effect of two inodilators, levosimendan and milrinone, on the plasma levels of myocardial injury biomarkers, that is, high-sensitivity troponin T and heart-type fatty acid binding protein, and on N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide as a biomarker of ventricular function. We hypothesized that levosimendan could attenuate the degree of myocardial injury when compared with milrinone.

DESIGN

A post hoc, nonprespecified exploratory secondary analysis of the Milrinone versus Levosimendan-1 trial (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02232399).

SETTING

Two pediatric tertiary university hospitals.

PATIENTS

Infants 1-12 months old, diagnosed with ventricular septal defect, complete atrioventricular septal defect, or Tetralogy of Fallot undergoing corrective surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass.

INTERVENTIONS

Seventy patients received a loading dose of either levosimendan or milrinone at the start of cardiopulmonary bypass followed by an infusion of the respective drug, which continued for 26 hours.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

Plasma levels of the three cardiac biomarkers were measured prior to the initiation of cardiopulmonary bypass and 2, 6, and 24 hours after weaning from cardiopulmonary bypass. In both groups, the levels of high-sensitivity troponin T and heart-type fatty acid binding protein were highest at 2 hours post cardiopulmonary bypass, whereas the highest level of N-terminal prohormone of brain natriuretic peptide occurred at 24 hours post cardiopulmonary bypass. There was no significant difference in the biomarkers' plasma levels between the study groups over time. Neither was there a significant difference in the postoperative peak plasma levels of the cardiac biomarkers.

CONCLUSIONS

In this post hoc analysis of the MiLe-1 trial, there was no demonstrable difference in the postoperative cardiac biomarker profile of myocardial injury and ventricular function when comparing infants managed in the perioperative period with levosimendan versus milrinone.

A systematic review of the evidence supporting post-operative medication use in congenital heart disease

BACKGROUND

Targeted drug development efforts in patients with CHD are needed to standardise care, improve outcomes, and limit adverse events in the post-operative period. To identify major gaps in knowledge that can be addressed by drug development efforts and provide a rationale for current clinical practice, this review evaluates the evidence behind the most common medication classes used in the post-operative care of children with CHD undergoing cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass.

METHODS

We systematically searched PubMed and EMBASE from 2000 to 2019 using a controlled vocabulary and keywords related to diuretics, vasoactives, sedatives, analgesics, pulmonary vasodilators, coagulation system medications, antiarrhythmics, steroids, and other endocrine drugs. We included studies of drugs given post-operatively to children with CHD undergoing repair or palliation with cardiopulmonary bypass.

RESULTS

We identified a total of 127 studies with 51,573 total children across medication classes. Most studies were retrospective cohorts at single centres. There is significant age- and disease-related variability in drug disposition, efficacy, and safety.

CONCLUSION

In this study, we discovered major gaps in knowledge for each medication class and identified areas for future research. Advances in data collection through electronic health records, novel trial methods, and collaboration can aid drug development efforts in standardising care, improving outcomes, and limiting adverse events in the post-operative period.

Current and Future Drug and Device Therapies for Pediatric Heart Failure Patients: Potential Lessons from Adult Trials

This review discusses the potential drug and device therapies for pediatric heart failure (HF) due to reduced systolic function. It is important to realize that most drugs that are used in pediatric HF are extrapolated from adult cardiology practices or consensus guidelines based on expert opinion rather than on evidence from controlled clinical trials. It is difficult to conclude whether the drugs that are well established in adult HF trials are also beneficial for children because of tremendous heterogeneity in the mechanism of HF in children and variations in the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of drugs from birth to adolescence. The lessons learned from adult trials can guide pediatric cardiologists to design clinical trials of the newer drugs that are in the pipeline to study their efficacy and safety in children with HF. This paper's focus is that the reader should specifically think through the pathophysiological mechanism of HF and the mode of action of drugs for the selection of appropriate pharmacotherapy. We review the drug and device trials in adults with HF to highlight the knowledge gap that exists in the pediatric HF population.

The direct comparison of inhaled versus intravenous levosimendan in children with pulmonary hypertension undergoing on-cardiopulmonary bypass cardiac surgery: A randomized, controlled, non-inferiority study

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Pulmonary arterial hypertension is commonly seen in children with left to right intracardiac shunts and affects the outcomes of cardiac surgery. Our study aimed to compare the efficacy of inhaled levosimendan (LS) versus intravenous LS in reducing elevated pulmonary artery pressure (PAP) in children scheduled for cardiac surgery.

DESIGN

Non-inferiority, prospective, randomized, blinded, controlled study.

SETTING

Operative room and intensive care unit (ICU), institutional children's hospital of Mansoura Faculty of Medicine, Egypt.

PATIENTS

50 patients of either sex, aged 1 to 5 years undergoing surgical repair of intracardiac left to right shunt complicated by pulmonary hypertension were recruited for the study.

INTERVENTIONS

In the intravenous LS group, patients received intravenous infusion of LS a rate of 0.1 μg/kg/min and in the inhaled LS group, LS (36 μg/kg/6 h) was delivered by nebulization.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary endpoint was systolic PAP, while the secondary endpoints were the heart rate, mean arterial blood pressure, dose of norepinephrine, time to extubation and ICU length of stay.

MAIN RESULTS

Both intravenous and inhaled routes of LS similarly reduced the high systolic PAP over all time points of measurement and intravenous LS was associated with higher heart rate, lower arterial pressure and the need for a higher dose of norepinephrine than the inhaled LS.

CONCLUSION

Inhalation of LS is non-inferior to intravenous LS in reducing high PAP in children who underwent on-pump cardiac surgery and it is associated with less tachycardia and hypotension with reduced need for vasoactive drugs.

Perioperative Milrinone Infusion Improves One-Year Survival After the Norwood-Sano Procedure

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this study was to investigate whether milrinone infusion improved one-year survival in patients who underwent the Norwood-Sano procedure.

DESIGN

A retrospective observational study.

SETTING

A single-institution university hospital.

PARTICIPANTS

Children who underwent the Norwood-Sano procedure from January 2008 to December 2014.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were categorized into two groups: group E+D, who received routine epinephrine and dopamine infusion, and group M, who received routine milrinone infusion for intra- and postoperative inotropic support.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The primary outcome of this study was one-year survival after the Norwood-Sano procedure. A total of 45 patients were included (group E+D, 22; group M, 23). One-year survival in group M was significantly higher than that in group E+D (95.7% [22/23] v 72.7% [16/22], p = 0.03). A Kaplan-Meier curve also showed that one-year survival in group M was significantly higher than that in group E+D (p = 0.04), from the result of the log-rank test. The number of patients who had any arrhythmias in the intensive care unit (ICU) was significantly lower in group M than in group E+D (21.7% [5/23] v 50% [11/22], p = 0.03). The duration of ICU stay did not have statistical difference between groups (group M 19; interquartile range [IQR], 15-28) v group E+D 19.5 (IQR, 16.3-35.5) days, p = 0.57).

CONCLUSIONS

Perioperative milrinone infusion improved the mortality after the Norwood-Sano procedure. Potential advantages of milrinone compared with epinephrine are fewer arrhythmias and better systemic perfusion, which could decrease lethal cardiac events in the ICU.

An evidence-based review of the use of vasoactive and inotropic medications in post-operative paediatric patients after cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass from 2000 to 2020

BACKGROUND

Infants with moderate-to-severe CHD frequently undergo cardiopulmonary bypass surgery in childhood. Morbidity and mortality are highest in those who develop post-operative low cardiac output syndrome. Vasoactive and inotropic medications are mainstays of treatment for these children, despite limited evidence supporting their use.

METHODS

To help inform clinical practice, as well as the conduct of future trials, we performed a systematic review of existing literature on inotropes and vasoactives in children after cardiac surgery using the PubMed and EMBASE databases. We included studies from 2000 to 2020, and the patient population was defined as birth - 18 years of age. Two reviewers independently reviewed studies to determine final eligibility.

RESULTS

The final analysis included 37 papers. Collectively, selected studies reported on 12 different vasoactive and inotropic medications in 2856 children. Overall evidence supporting the use of these drugs in children after cardiopulmonary bypass was limited. The majority of studies were small with 30/37 (81%) enrolling less than 100 patients, 29/37 (78%) were not randomised, and safety and efficacy endpoints differed widely, limiting the ability to combine data for meta-analyses.

CONCLUSION

Vasoactive and inotropic support remain critical parts of post-operative care for children after cardiopulmonary bypass surgery. There is a paucity of data for the selection and dosing of vasoactives and inotropes for these patients. Despite the knowledge gaps that remain, numerous recent innovations create opportunities to rethink the conduct of clinical trials in this high-risk population.

Management of Neonatal Hypotension and Shock

The current standard approach to manage circulatory insufficiency is inappropriately simple and clear: respond to low blood pressure to achieve higher values. However, the evidence for this is limited affecting all steps within the process: assessment, decision making, therapeutic options, and treatment effects. We have to overcome the 'one size fits all' approach and respect the dynamic physiologic transition from fetal to neonatal life in the context of complex underlying conditions. Caregivers need to individualize their approaches to individual circumstances. This paper will review various clinical scenarios, including managing transitional low blood pressure, to circulatory impairment involving different pathologies such as hypoxia-ischemia and sepsis. We will highlight the current evidence and set potential goals for future development in these areas. We hope to encourage caregivers to question the current standards and to support urgently needed research in this overlooked but crucial field of neonatal intensive care.

Effect of Prophylactic Levosimendan on All-Cause Mortality in Pediatric Patients Undergoing Cardiac Surgery-An Updated Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Levosimendan, a calcium sensitizer, enhances the myocardial function by generating more energy-efficient myocardial contractility than that achieved through adrenergic stimulation with catecholamines. We conducted this meta-analysis to primarily investigate the effects of levosimendan on all-cause mortality in pediatric patients undergoing cardiac surgery under cardiopulmonary bypass. Methods: The databases of Pubmed, Embase, and Cochrane Library were searched till 21st March 2020. The eligible criteria were participants with age<18 year and undergoing cardiac surgery for congenital heart disease (CHD), and studies of comparison between levosimendan and placebo or other inotropes. Stata version 12.0 was used to perform statistical analyses. Results: Six randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 1 case-control trial (CCT) including 436 patients were included. The results showed that levosimendan did not significantly decrease all-cause mortality compared with control drugs (and placebo) in children undergoing cardiac surgery (P = 0.403). Perioperative prophylactic levosimendan administration strikingly decreased the low cardiac output syndrome (LCOS) incidence (P = 0.016) but did not significantly reduce acute kidney injury (AKI) incidence (P = 0.251) and shorten mechanical ventilation and ICU stay time compared with other inotropes and placebo by analyzing the included literatures [mechanical ventilation (or intubation) time: P = 0.188; ICU stay time: P = 0.620]. Conclusions: Compared with other inotropes and placebo, perioperative prophylactic administration of levosimendan did not decrease the rates of mortality and AKI and shorten the time of mechanical ventilation (or intubation) and ICU stay but demonstrated a significant reduction in LCOS incidence after corrective surgery in pediatric patients for CHD. Due to limited number of included studies, the current data were insufficient to make the conclusions.

Prophylactic use of levosimendan in pediatric patients undergoing cardiac surgery: a prospective randomized controlled trial

Background

The administration of levosimendan prophylactically to patients undergoing cardiac surgery remains a controversial practice, and few studies have specifically assessed the value of this approach in pediatric patients. This study therefore sought to explore the safety and efficacy of prophylactic levosimendan administration to pediatric patients as a means of preventing low cardiac output syndrome (LCOS) based upon hemodynamic, biomarker, and pharmacokinetic readouts.

Methods

This was a single-center, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial. Patients ≤ 48 months old were enrolled between July 2018 and April 2019 and were randomly assigned to groups that received either placebo or levosimendan infusions for 48 h post-surgery, along with all other standard methods of care. LCOS incidence was the primary outcome of this study.

Results

A total of 187 patients were enrolled, of whom 94 and 93 received levosimendan and placebo, respectively. LCOS incidence did not differ significantly between the levosimendan and placebo groups (10 [10.6%] versus 18 [19.4%] patients, respectively; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.19–1.13; p = 0.090) nor did 90-day mortality (3 [3.2%] versus 4 [4.3%] patients, CI 0.14–3.69, p = 0.693), duration of mechanical ventilation (median, 47.5 h and 39.5 h, respectively; p = 0.532), ICU stay (median, 114.5 h and 118 h, respectively; p = 0.442), and hospital stay (median, 20 days and 20 days, respectively; p = 0.806). The incidence of hypotension and cardiac arrhythmia did not differ significantly between the groups. Levels of levosimendan fell rapidly without any plateau in plasma concentrations during infusion. A multiple logistic regression indicated that randomization to the levosimendan group was a predictor of LCOS.

Conclusions

Prophylactic levosimendan administration was safe in pediatric patients and had some benefit to postoperative hemodynamic parameters, but failed to provide significant benefit with respect to LCOS or 90-day mortality relative to placebo.

Trial registration

Name of the registry: Safety evaluation and therapeutic effect of levosimendan on the low cardiac output syndrome in patients after cardiopulmonary bypass. Trial registration number: ChiCTR1800016594. Date of registration: 11 June 2018. URL of trial registry record: http://www.chictr.org.cn/index.aspx

The Effect of Levosimendan Versus Milrinone on the Occurrence Rate of Acute Kidney Injury Following Congenital Heart Surgery in Infants: A Randomized Clinical Trial

OBJECTIVES

It has been shown that, in contrast to other inotropic agents, levosimendan improves glomerular filtration rate after adult cardiac surgery. The aim of this study was to investigate the efficacy of levosimendan, compared with milrinone, in preventing acute kidney dysfunction in infants after open-heart surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass.

DESIGN

Two-center, double-blinded, prospective, randomized clinical trial.

SETTING

The study was performed in two tertiary pediatric centers, one in Sweden (Gothenburg) and one in Finland (Helsinki).

PATIENTS

Infants between 1 and 12 months old, diagnosed with Tetralogy of Fallot, complete atrioventricular septal defect or nonrestrictive ventricular septal defect, undergoing total corrective cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass.

INTERVENTIONS

Seventy-two infants were randomized to receive a perioperative infusion of levosimendan (0.1 µg/kg/min) or milrinone (0.4 µg/kg/min). The infusion was initiated at the start of cardiopulmonary bypass and continued for 26 hours.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS

The primary outcome variable was the absolute value of serum creatinine data on postoperative day 1. Secondary outcomes included the following: 1) acute kidney injury according to the serum creatinine criteria of the Kidney Diseases: Improving Global Outcomes; 2) acute kidney injury with serum creatinine corrected for fluid balance; 3) plasma neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin; 4) cystatin C; 5) urea; 6) lactate; 7) hemodynamic variables; 8) use of diuretics in the PICU; 9) need of dialysis; 10) length of ventilator therapy; and 11) length of PICU stays. There was no significant difference in postoperative serum creatinine between the treatment groups over time (p = 0.65). The occurrence rate of acute kidney injury within 48 hours was 46.9% in the levosimendan group and 39.5% in the milrinone group (p = 0.70). There were no significant differences in other secondary outcome variables between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Levosimendan compared with milrinone did not reduce the occurrence rate of acute kidney injury in infants after total corrective heart surgery for atrioventricular septal defect, ventricular septal defect, or Tetralogy of Fallot.

Levosimendan treatment in a child with treatment-resistant left ventricular systolic dysfunction after scorpion sting

Background:

Scorpion stings are common in countries dominated by rural and coastal settlements with temperate climate. Scorpion stings are usually harmless and can be seen in local findings, but in some cases, systemic, neurotoxic, and cardiotoxic findings can be seen.

Case report:

A 3 year 7 month old girl was referred to pediatric emergency care 2 h after yellow scorpion (species of Leiurus abdullahbayrami) sting. In our case, cardiac function insufficiently progressed in spite of the standard inotropic and milrinone treatment. On the third day of hospitalization, levosimendan was initiated with good clinical effect.

Conclusion:

In the literature, the use of levosimendan in pediatric patients has been limited to those with low cardiac output syndrome after cardiovascular surgery. The use of levosimendan in children with scorpion sting has been previously reported only in Banille et al.’s study. Scorpion antivenom should be administered intravenously as soon as possible in cases of systemic findings that develop after scorpion stings. This report suggests that levosimendan is temporally associated with improvement in patients who have severe cardiac dysfunction due to scorpion sting and refractory to current treatment.

Levosimendan for Perioperative Cardioprotection: Myth or Reality?

BACKGROUND

Levosimendan is a calcium sensitizer drug causing increased contractility in the myocardium and vasodilation in the vascular system. It is mainly used for the therapy of acute decompensated heart failure. Several studies on animals and humans provided evidence of the cardioprotective properties of levosimendan including preconditioning and anti-apoptotic. In view of these favorable effects, levosimendan has been tested in patients undergoing cardiac surgery for the prevention or treatment of low cardiac output syndrome. However, initial positive results from small studies have not been confirmed in three recent large trials.

AIM

To summarize levosimendan mechanisms of action and clinical use and to review available evidence on its perioperative use in a cardiac surgery setting.

METHODS

We searched two electronic medical databases for randomized controlled trials studying levosimendan in cardiac surgery patients, ranging from January 2000 to August 2017. Metaanalyses, consensus documents and retrospective studies were also reviewed.

RESULTS

In the selected interval of time, 54 studies on the use of levosimendan in heart surgery have been performed. Early small size studies and meta-analyses have suggested that perioperative levosimendan infusion could diminish mortality and other adverse outcomes (i.e. intensive care unit stay and need for inotropic support). Instead, three recent large randomized controlled trials (LEVO-CTS, CHEETAH and LICORN) showed no significant survival benefits from levosimendan. However, in LEVO-CTS trial, prophylactic levosimendan administration significantly reduced the incidence of low cardiac output syndrome.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on most recent randomized controlled trials, levosimendan, although effective for the treatment of acute heart failure, can't be recommended as standard therapy for the management of heart surgery patients. Further studies are needed to clarify whether selected subgroups of heart surgery patients may benefit from perioperative levosimendan infusion.

Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation in Infants and Children With Cardiac Disease: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association

Cardiac arrest occurs at a higher rate in children with heart disease than in healthy children. Pediatric basic life support and advanced life support guidelines focus on delivering high-quality resuscitation in children with normal hearts. The complexity and variability in pediatric heart disease pose unique challenges during resuscitation. A writing group appointed by the American Heart Association reviewed the literature addressing resuscitation in children with heart disease. MEDLINE and Google Scholar databases were searched from 1966 to 2015, cross-referencing pediatric heart disease with pertinent resuscitation search terms. The American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association classification of recommendations and levels of evidence for practice guidelines were used. The recommendations in this statement concur with the critical components of the 2015 American Heart Association pediatric basic life support and pediatric advanced life support guidelines and are meant to serve as a resuscitation supplement. This statement is meant for caregivers of children with heart disease in the prehospital and in-hospital settings. Understanding the anatomy and physiology of the high-risk pediatric cardiac population will promote early recognition and treatment of decompensation to prevent cardiac arrest, increase survival from cardiac arrest by providing high-quality resuscitations, and improve outcomes with postresuscitation care.

Hemodynamic support of a 15-year-old waiting for a heart transplant: Is there a role for levosimendan in pediatric heart failure?

Decompensated heart failure in children requires rapid and aggressive support. In refractory cases, invasive supportive care is essential to ensure cardiac output. This results in lengthy pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) stays, secondary morbidity, and high cost. Levosimendan may help palliate the pitfalls encountered with the usual treatment. It has been shown to improve hemodynamics and decrease morbidity and mortality from heart failure in adult trials and pediatric cohorts. We report the case of a 15-year-old boy with dilated cardiomyopathy and refractory ventricular dysfunction who was weaned from continuous inotropes and discharged from the PICU with levosimendan while waiting for heart transplantation.

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.

Levosimendan for Pediatric Anomalous Left Coronary Artery From the Pulmonary Artery Undergoing Repair: A Single-Center Experience

Objectives: Our aim was to retrospectively evaluate the benefit of levosimendan in certain complicated congenital heart procedures such as the pediatric anomalous origin of the left coronary artery from the pulmonary artery (ALCAPA) with moderate or severe cardiac dysfunction and its repair. Study Design: We enrolled 40 pediatric patients with ALCAPA and moderate or severe left ventricular dysfunction. Patients who had a preoperative left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) of 50% or less and had undergone the surgical correction of their coronary artery through cardiopulmonary bypass met the criteria of our study. Twenty patients were given 0.1-0.2 μg/kg/min levosimendan at the induction of anesthesia, which lasted for 24 h. The remaining 20 patients were not given levosimendan. Results: The mean preoperative LVEF in the levosimendan group was significantly lower than that in the non-levosimendan group (22.5 ± 10.7% vs. 31.8 ± 8.1%, p = 0.004). On postoperative day 7, the LVEF in the levosimendan group was still significantly lower (27.1 ± 8.9% vs. 37.5 ± 11.0%, p = 0.002). There was no significant difference in ΔLVEF detected on day 7 [median 30.8%, interquartile range (IQR) -4.4 to 63.5% vs. median 15.1%, IQR -3.5 to 40.0%, p = 0.560] or at follow-up of about 180 days (median 123.5%, IQR 56.1-222.6% vs. median 80.0%, IQR 36.4-131.3%, p = 0.064). There was no significant difference between the two groups in postoperative vasoactive-inotropic score (VIS) at any of the time points of 1, 6, 12, 24, and 48 h (p = 0.093). Three patients had to be supported by extracorporeal membrane oxygenation when difficulty appeared in weaning off cardiopulmonary bypass because of low cardiac output in the non-levosimendan group, but no patient needed extracorporeal membrane oxygenation after levosimendan infusion (p = 0.231). The length of intensive care unit stay (median 10.5 days, IQR 7.3-39.3 days vs. median 4.0 days, IQR 2.0-10.0 days, p = 0.002) and duration of mechanical ventilation (median 146.0 h, IQR 76.5-888.0 h vs. median 27.0 h, IQR 11.0-75.0 h, p = 0.002) were revealed to be longer in the levosimendan group. Peritoneal dialysis occurred in eight patients (40%) in the levosimendan group and two patients (10%) in the non-levosimendan group (p = 0.028). No significant difference was revealed in all-cause mortality within 180 days, which occurred in two patients (10%) in the levosimendan group and one (5%) in the non-levosimendan group (p = 1.00). Conclusion: Levosimendan's unique pharmacological properties have strong potential for cardiac function recovery among pediatric patients with ALCAPA with impaired left ventricular function who have undergone surgical repair.However, any improvement from levosimendan on postoperative outcomes or mortality was not substantiated by this study and must be investigated further.

The Perspective of the Intensivist on Inotropes and Postoperative Care Following Pediatric Heart Surgery: An International Survey and Systematic Review of the Literature

Introduction:

Inotropes are frequently being used in children undergoing heart surgery to prevent or treat low cardiac output syndrome (LCOS). There is only limited evidence that inotropes actually positively influence postoperative outcome. Our aim was to describe the current international practice variation in the use of inotropes following congenital heart surgery.

Methods:

We developed an online survey regarding the postoperative use of inotropes. We sent an invitation to all 197 registered members of the Pediatric Cardiac Intensive Care Society (PCICS) to participate in the survey. We also performed a systematic review of the literature.

Results:

Ninety-eight people (50%) responded, representing 62 international centers. Milrinone is routinely used perioperatively by 90 respondents (97%). Adrenaline/epinephrine is routinely used by 43%, dopamine by 36%, dobutamine by 11%, and levosimendan by 6%. Steroids are used routinely by 54% before initiating cardiopulmonary bypass. Vasopressin is used by 44% of respondents. The development of LCOS is monitored with lactate in 99% of respondents, physical examination (98%), intermittent mixed venous saturation (76%), continuous mixed venous saturation (13%), echocardiography (53%), core–peripheral temperature gap (29%), near-infrared spectrometry (25%), and 4% use cardiac output monitors (PiCCO, USCOM). To improve cardiac output, 42% add/increase milrinone, 37% add adrenaline, and 15% add dopamine. Rescue therapy is titrated individually, based on the patients’ pathophysiology. A systematic review of the literature failed to show compelling evidence with regard to the benefit of inotropes.

Conclusions:

Despite the lack of sufficient evidence, milrinone is used by the vast majority of caregivers following congenital heart surgery.

Prophylactic levosimendan for the prevention of low cardiac output syndrome and mortality in paediatric patients undergoing surgery for congenital heart disease

BACKGROUND

Low cardiac output syndrome remains a serious complication, and accounts for substantial morbidity and mortality in the postoperative course of paediatric patients undergoing surgery for congenital heart disease. Standard prophylactic and therapeutic strategies for low cardiac output syndrome are based mainly on catecholamines, which are effective drugs, but have considerable side effects. Levosimendan, a calcium sensitiser, enhances the myocardial function by generating more energy-efficient myocardial contractility than achieved via adrenergic stimulation with catecholamines. Thus potentially, levosimendan is a beneficial alternative to standard medication for the prevention of low cardiac output syndrome in paediatric patients after open heart surgery.

OBJECTIVES

To review the efficacy and safety of the postoperative prophylactic use of levosimendan for the prevention of low cardiac output syndrome and mortality in paediatric patients undergoing surgery for congenital heart disease.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified trials via systematic searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science, as well as clinical trial registries, in June 2016. Reference lists from primary studies and review articles were checked for additional references.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We only included randomised controlled trials (RCT) in our analysis that compared prophylactic levosimendan with standard medication or placebo, in infants and children up to 18 years of age, who were undergoing surgery for congenital heart disease.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias according to a pre-defined protocol. We obtained additional information from all but one of the study authors of the included studies. We used the five GRADE considerations (study limitations, consistency of effect, imprecision, indirectness, and publication bias) to assess the quality of evidence from the studies that contributed data to the meta-analyses for the prespecified outcomes. We created a 'Summary of findings' table to summarise the results and the quality of evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five randomised controlled trials with a total of 212 participants in the analyses. All included participants were under five years of age. Using GRADE, we assessed there was low-quality evidence for all analysed outcomes. We assessed high risk of performance and detection bias for two studies due to their unblinded setting. Levosimendan showed no clear effect on risk of mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.12 to 1.82; participants = 123; studies = 3) and no clear effect on low cardiac output syndrome (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.04; participants = 83; studies = 2) compared to standard treatments. Data on time-to-death were not available from any of the included studies.There was no conclusive evidence on the effect of levosimendan on the secondary outcomes. The length of intensive care unit stays (mean difference (MD) 0.33 days, 95% CI -1.16 to 1.82; participants = 188; studies = 4), length of hospital stays (MD 0.26 days, 95% CI -3.50 to 4.03; participants = 75; studies = 2), duration of mechanical ventilation (MD -0.04 days, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.00; participants = 208; studies = 5), and the risk of mechanical circulatory support or cardiac transplantation (RR 1.49, 95% CI 0.19 to 11.37; participants = 60; studies = 2) did not clearly differ between the groups. Published data about adverse effects of levosimendan were limited. A meta-analysis of hypotension, one of the most feared side effects of levosimendan, was not feasible because of the heterogeneous expression of blood pressure values.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The current level of evidence is insufficient to judge whether prophylactic levosimendan prevents low cardiac output syndrome and mortality in paediatric patients undergoing surgery for congenital heart disease. So far, no significant differences have been detected between levosimendan and standard inotrope treatments in this setting.The authors evaluated the quality of evidence as low, using the GRADE approach. Reasons for downgrading were serious risk of bias (performance and detection bias due to unblinded setting of two RCTs), serious risk of inconsistency, and serious to very serious risk of imprecision (small number of included patients, low event rates).

Prophylactic levosimendan for the prevention of low cardiac output syndrome and mortality in paediatric patients undergoing surgery for congenital heart disease

BACKGROUND

Low cardiac output syndrome remains a serious complication, and accounts for substantial morbidity and mortality in the postoperative course of paediatric patients undergoing surgery for congenital heart disease. Standard prophylactic and therapeutic strategies for low cardiac output syndrome are based mainly on catecholamines, which are effective drugs, but have considerable side effects. Levosimendan, a calcium sensitiser, enhances the myocardial function by generating more energy-efficient myocardial contractility than achieved via adrenergic stimulation with catecholamines. Thus potentially, levosimendan is a beneficial alternative to standard medication for the prevention of low cardiac output syndrome in paediatric patients after open heart surgery.

OBJECTIVES

To review the efficacy and safety of the postoperative prophylactic use of levosimendan for the prevention of low cardiac output syndrome and mortality in paediatric patients undergoing surgery for congenital heart disease.

SEARCH METHODS

We identified trials via systematic searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, and Web of Science, as well as clinical trial registries, in June 2016. Reference lists from primary studies and review articles were checked for additional references.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We only included randomised controlled trials (RCT) in our analysis that compared prophylactic levosimendan with standard medication or placebo, in infants and children up to 18 years of age, who were undergoing surgery for congenital heart disease.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data and assessed risk of bias according to a pre-defined protocol. We obtained additional information from all but one of the study authors of the included studies. We used the five GRADE considerations (study limitations, consistency of effect, imprecision, indirectness, and publication bias) to assess the quality of evidence from the studies that contributed data to the meta-analyses for the prespecified outcomes. We created a 'Summary of findings' table to summarise the results and the quality of evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included five randomised controlled trials with a total of 212 participants in the analyses. All included participants were under five years of age. Using GRADE, we assessed there was low-quality evidence for all analysed outcomes. We assessed high risk of performance and detection bias for two studies due to their unblinded setting. Levosimendan showed no clear effect on risk of mortality (risk ratio (RR) 0.47, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.12 to 1.82; participants = 123; studies = 3) and no clear effect on low cardiac output syndrome (RR 0.64, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.04; participants = 83; studies = 2) compared to standard treatments. Data on time-to-death were not available from any of the included studies.There was no conclusive evidence on the effect of levosimendan on the secondary outcomes. The levosimendan groups had shorter length of intensive care unit stays (mean difference (MD) 0.33 days, 95% CI -1.16 to 1.82; participants = 188; studies = 4; I² = 35%), length of hospital stays (0.26 days, 95% CI -3.50 to 4.03; participants = 75; studies = 2), and duration of mechanical ventilation (MD -0.04 days, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.00; participants = 208; studies = 5; I² = 0%). The risk of mechanical circulatory support or cardiac transplantation favoured the levosimendan groups (RR 1.49, 95% CI 0.19 to 11.37; participants = 60; studies = 2). Published data about adverse effects of levosimendan were limited. A meta-analysis of hypotension, one of the most feared side effects of levosimendan, was not feasible because of the heterogeneous expression of blood pressure values.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The current level of evidence is insufficient to judge whether prophylactic levosimendan prevents low cardiac output syndrome and mortality in paediatric patients undergoing surgery for congenital heart disease. So far, no significant differences have been detected between levosimendan and standard inotrope treatments in this setting.The authors evaluated the quality of evidence as low, using the GRADE approach. Reasons for downgrading were serious risk of bias (performance and detection bias due to unblinded setting of two RCTs), serious risk of inconsistency, and serious to very serious risk of imprecision (small number of included patients, low event rates).

The Hemodynamic Effects and Safety of Repetitive Levosimendan Infusions on Children With Dilated Cardiomyopathy

BACKGROUND

Limited treatment options are available for children with decompensated dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM), while they wait for either functional recovery or heart transplantation. We evaluated the safety of repetitive levosimendan infusions and short-term and long-term impacts of the therapy in this patient population.

METHODS

Eighty-one repetitive levosimendan infusions administered to 20 patients with DCM at severe or end stage of the disease in the pediatric intensive care unit were analyzed retrospectively. Echocardiographic assessments were reinterpreted by two experienced pediatric cardiologists. The mean follow-up time after therapy was 9.8 ± 3.3 years.

RESULTS

The median age of the patients at the time of the first levosimendan infusion was 1.1 years (interquartile range: 0.3-2.1). Transient hypotension was reported in 17.3% of the infusions. No significant changes in the mean ejection fraction were detected after repetitive levosimendan infusion (31.6 ± 12.5 vs 33.1 ± 12.4; P = .39) or for the laboratory parameters for the group as a whole. In 7 (35%) of 20 patients, the mean ejection fraction improved from 20% ± 12% to 35% ± 11% ( P = .003). The administration of concomitant medications and time may have contributed to the healing process of these patients. Two patients were removed from the transplantation waiting-list owing to clinical recovery after six months of therapy. The long-term survival rate was 70% (n = 14 of 20).

CONCLUSIONS

Repetitive levosimendan infusions in children with DCM appeared to be hemodynamically well tolerated without severe adverse events. Although one-third of the children had a good response to repetitive levosimendan infusions, no overall significant improvement in ventricular performance could be found in this heterogenous DCM patient population, which included the patients in end-stage heart failure.

Vasoactive Drugs and Hemodynamic Monitoring in Pediatric Cardiac Intensive Care: An Italian Survey

BACKGROUND

Little is known about practitioner preference, the availability of technology, and variability in practice with respect to hemodynamic monitoring and vasoactive drug use after congenital heart surgery. The aim of this study was to characterize current hospital practices related to the management of low cardiac output syndrome (LCOS) across Italy.

METHODS

We issued a 22-item questionnaire to 14 Italian hospitals performing pediatric cardiac surgery.

RESULTS

Electrocardiogram, invasive blood pressure, central venous pressure, pulse oximetry, diuresis, body temperature, arterial lactate, and blood gas analysis were identified as routine in hemodynamic monitoring. With regard to advanced hemodynamic monitoring, pulmonary arterial catheter and transpulmonary thermodilution were available in 43% of the centers, uncalibrated pulse contour methods in 29% of the centers, and transesophageal/transthoracic echocardiograms in all of the centers. Dopamine added to milrinone was the most frequent drug regimen for LCOS prevention after cardiopulmonary bypass. Overall, 86% of centers used milrinone alone as the initial treatment for LCOS with elevated systemic vascular resistances and levosimendan, the second preferred choice. In cases of LCOS with low vascular resistance, epinephrine was the first choice (10 centers), dopamine was the second choice (4 centers), followed by vasopressin and norepinephrine (3 centers). For treatment of LCOS with elevated pulmonary resistances, milrinone was the first choice (eight centers), followed by inhaled nitric oxide (five centers).

CONCLUSIONS

The survey shows that advanced hemodynamic monitoring is rarely performed. The most commonly used vasoactive drugs are milrinone, levosimendan, dopamine, epinephrine, vasopressin, and norepinephrine. Guidelines on the topic are warranted.

[Use of levosimendan in children]

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

Levosimendan. A promising future drug for refractory cardiac failure in children?

Intravenous positive inotropic agents play an important role in treating acute decompensation of patients with heart failure due to left ventricular systolic dysfunction. Levosimendan is a new positive inotropic agent having ATP-dependent potassium-channel opening, and calcium-sensitizing effects, which increases cardiac contractility and performance along with vasodilatatory action without increasing myocardial oxygen demand. We report a case of a 12-year-old girl with viral myocarditis, dilated cardiomyopathy, biventricular failure with severe left ventricular dysfunction, refractory to standard management, and who was successfully improved with levosimendan.

Successful use of levosimendan as a primary inotrope in pediatric cardiac surgery: An observational study in 110 patients

Context:

Levosimendan is a new generation inotrope with calcium sensitizing properties and proven benefits in adults.

Aims:

This study investigates the use of levosimendan as a first line inotrope in congenital heart surgery.

Settings and Design:

Prospective, observational study in a tertiary care center.

Materials and Methods:

One hundred and ten patients undergoing congenital cardiac surgery received levosimendan at a loading dose of 12 mcg/kg during rewarming on cardiopulmonary bypass followed by continuous infusion of 0.1 mcg/kg/min for 48 h. Hemodynamic parameters were recorded at the time of admission to Intensive Care Unit, and at 3 h, 6 h, 12 h, 24 h, and 48 h thereafter.

Statistical Analysis:

Categorical variables were compared using Chi-square test. Non-normally distributed quantitative variables were compared between groups using Kruskal-Wallis test.

Results:

At discharge from operating room (OR), 36 (32.7%) patients required levosimendan alone to maintain optimum cardiac output, 59 (53.6%) patients required the addition of low-dose adrenaline (<0.1 mcg/kg/min) and 15 (13.6%) patients required either increment in adrenaline to high-dose (≥0.1 mcg/kg/min) or starting another inotrope/vasoactive agent. Overall, there were five mortalities. Hypotension leading to discontinuation of levosimendan was not found in any patient. Arrhythmias were observed in three patients. Fifty-four patients were extubated in the OR.

Conclusions:

Levosimendan-based inotropic regime offers optimized cardiac output with a well-controlled heart rate and a low incidence of arrhythmias in patients undergoing all categories of congenital heart surgeries.

Initial Observations of the Effects of Calcium Chloride Infusions in Pediatric Patients with Low Cardiac Output

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.

Experts' recommendations for the management of cardiogenic shock in children

Cardiogenic shock which corresponds to an acute state of circulatory failure due to impairment of myocardial contractility is a very rare disease in children, even more than in adults. To date, no international recommendations regarding its management in critically ill children are available. An experts’ recommendations in adult population have recently been made (Levy et al. Ann Intensive Care 5(1):52, 2015; Levy et al. Ann Intensive Care 5(1):26, 2015). We present herein recommendations for the management of cardiogenic shock in children, developed with the grading of recommendations’ assessment, development, and evaluation system by an expert group of the Groupe Francophone de Réanimation et Urgences Pédiatriques (French Group for Pediatric Intensive Care and Emergencies). The recommendations cover four major fields of application such as: recognition of early signs of shock and the patient pathway, management principles and therapeutic goals, monitoring hemodynamic and biological variables, and circulatory support (indications, techniques, organization, and transfer criteria). Major principle care for children with cardiogenic shock is primarily based on clinical and echocardiographic assessment. There are few drugs reported as effective in childhood in the medical literature. The use of circulatory support should be facilitated in terms of organization and reflected in the centers that support these children. Children with cardiogenic shock are vulnerable and should be followed regularly by intensivist cardiologists and pediatricians. The experts emphasize the multidisciplinary nature of management of children with cardiogenic shock and the importance of effective communication between emergency medical assistance teams (SAMU), mobile pediatric emergency units (SMUR), pediatric emergency departments, pediatric cardiology and cardiac surgery departments, and pediatric intensive care units.

Postoperative management of heart failure in pediatric patients

Low cardiac output syndrome (LCOS) is a well-described entity occurring in 25-65% of pediatric patients undergoing open-heart surgery. With judicious intensive care management of LCOS, most patients have an uncomplicated postoperative course, and within 24 h after cardiopulmonary bypass, the cardiac function returns back to baseline. Some patients have severe forms of LCOS not responsive to medical management alone, requiring temporary mechanical circulatory support to prevent end-organ injury and to decrease myocardial stress and oxygen demand. Occasionally, cardiac function does not recover and heart transplantation is necessary. Long-term mechanical circulatory support devices are used as a bridge to transplantation because of limited availability of donor hearts. Experience in usage of continuous flow ventricular assist devices in the pediatric population is increasing.

Management of Shock in Neonates

Shock is characterized by inadequate oxygen delivery to the tissues, and is more frequent in very low birth weight infants, especially in the first few days of life. Shock is an independent predictor of mortality, and the survivors are at a higher risk of neurologic impairment. Understanding the pathophysiology helps to recognize and classify shock in the early compensated phase and initiate appropriate treatment. Hypovolemia is rarely the primary cause of shock in neonates. Myocardial dysfunction is especially common in extremely preterm infants, and in term infants with perinatal asphyxia. Blood pressure measurements are easy, but correlate poorly with cerebral and systemic blood flows. Point-of-care cardiac ultrasound can help in individualized assessment of problems, selecting appropriate therapy and monitoring response, but may not always be available, and long-term benefits need to be demonstrated. The use of near-infrared spectroscopy to guide treatment of neonatal shock is currently experimental. In the absence of hypovolemia, excessive administration of fluid boluses is inappropriate therapy. Dobutamine and dopamine are the most common initial inotropes used in neonatal shock. Dobutamine has been shown to improve systemic blood flow, especially in very low birth weight infants, but dopamine is better at improving blood pressure in hypotensive infants. Newer inodilators including milrinone and levosimendan may be useful in selected settings. Data on long-term survival and neurologic outcomes following different management strategies are scarce and future research efforts should focus on this.

Prophylactic milrinone for the prevention of low cardiac output syndrome and mortality in children undergoing surgery for congenital heart disease

BACKGROUND

Children with congenital heart disease often undergo heart surgery at a young age. They are at risk for postoperative low cardiac output syndrome (LCOS) or death. Milrinone may be used to provide inotropic and vasodilatory support during the immediate postoperative period.

OBJECTIVES

This review examines the effectiveness of prophylactic postoperative use of milrinone to prevent LCOS or death in children having undergone surgery for congenital heart disease.

SEARCH METHODS

Electronic and manual literature searches were performed to identify randomised controlled trials. We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science in February 2014 and conducted a top-up search in September 2014 as well as clinical trial registries and reference lists of published studies. We did not apply any language restrictions.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Only randomised controlled trials were selected for analysis. We considered studies with newborn infants, infants, toddlers, and children up to 12 years of age.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently extracted data according to a pre-defined protocol. We obtained additional information from all study authors.

MAIN RESULTS

Three of the five included studies compared milrinone versus levosimendan, one study compared milrinone with placebo, and one compared milrinone verus dobutamine, with 101, 242, and 50 participants, respectively. Three trials were at low risk of bias while two were at higher risk of bias. The number and definitions of outcomes were non-uniform as well. In one study comparing two doses of milrinone and placebo, there was some evidence in an overall comparison of milrinone versus placebo that milrinone lowered risk for LCOS (risk ratio (RR) 0.52, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.28 to 0.96; 227 participants). The results from two small studies do not provide enough information to determine whether milrinone increases the risk of LCOS when compared to levosimendan (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.32 to 4.65; 59 participants). Mortality rates in the studies were low, and there was insufficient evidence to draw conclusions on the effect of milrinone compared to placebo or levosimendan or dobutamine regarding mortality, the duration of intensive care stay, hospital stay, mechanical ventilation, or maximum inotrope score (where available). Numbers of patients requiring mechanical cardiac support were also low and did not allow a comparison between studies, and none of the participants of any study received a heart transplantation up to the end of the respective follow-up period. Time to death within three months was not reported in any of the included studies. A number of adverse events was examined, but differences between the treatment groups could not be proven for hypotension, intraventricular haemorrhage, hypokalaemia, bronchospasm, elevated serum levels of liver enzymes, or a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction < 50% or reduced left ventricular fraction of shortening < 28%. Our analysis did not prove an increased risk of arrhythmias in patients treated prophylactically with milrinone compared with placebo (RR 3.59, 95% CI 0.83 to 15.42; 238 participants), a decreased risk of pleural effusions (RR 1.78, 95% CI 0.92 to 3.42; 231 participants), or a difference in risk of thrombocytopenia on milrinone compared with placebo (RR 0.86, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.88; 238 participants). Comparisons of milrinone with levosimendan or with dobutamine, respectively, did not clarify the risk of arrhythmia and were not possible for pleural effusions or thrombocytopenia.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There is insufficient evidence of the effectiveness of prophylactic milrinone in preventing death or low cardiac output syndrome in children undergoing surgery for congenital heart disease, compared to placebo. So far, no differences have been shown between milrinone and other inodilators, such as levosimendan or dobutamine, in the immediate postoperative period, in reducing the risk of LCOS or death. The existing data on the prophylactic use of milrinone has to be viewed cautiously due to the small number of small trials and their risk of bias.

Perioperative pharmacological management of pulmonary hypertensive crisis during congenital heart surgery

Pulmonary hypertensive crisis is an important cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with pulmonary arterial hypertension secondary to congenital heart disease (PAH-CHD) who require cardiac surgery. At present, prevention and management of perioperative pulmonary hypertensive crisis is aimed at optimizing cardiopulmonary interactions by targeting prostacyclin, endothelin, and nitric oxide signaling pathways within the pulmonary circulation with various pharmacological agents. This review is aimed at familiarizing the practitioner with the current pharmacological treatment for dealing with perioperative pulmonary hypertensive crisis in PAH-CHD patients. Given the life-threatening complications associated with pulmonary hypertensive crisis, proper perioperative planning can help anticipate cardiopulmonary complications and optimize surgical outcomes in this patient population.

Is levosimendan effective in paediatric heart failure and post-cardiac surgeries?

A best evidence topic in cardiothoracic surgery was written according to a structured protocol. The question addressed was 'do children with heart failure post-cardiac surgery undergoing treatment with levosimendan have an acceptable haemodynamic improvement?' The use of levosimendan as a vasoactive drug is an accepted intervention for patients with altered haemodynamics post-cardiac surgeries. However, the role of levosimendan and its efficacy have been debated. Eleven relevant papers were identified, which represented the best evidence to answer the question. The author, journal, date, country of publication and relevant outcomes are tabulated. The 11 studies comprised 3 randomized trials, 2 of which compared levosimendan and milrinone. A single-centre randomized study that included 40 infants showed that cardiac output (CO) and cardiac index (CI) increased overtime in the levosimendan group compared with the milrinone group. The significant interaction for CO (P = 0.005) and CI (P = 0.007) indicated different time courses in the two groups. A similar, European randomized study undertaken on neonates (n = 63) showed better lactate levels [P = 0.015 (intensive care admission); P = 0.048 (after 6 h) with low inotropic scores in the levosimendan group. Although the length of mechanical ventilation and mortality were less, this was statistically insignificant. A retrospective cohort analysis (n = 13) in children reported a reduced use of dobutamine and improvement in the ejection fraction from 29.8 to 40.5% (P = 0.015) with the use of levosimendan. In a questionnaire-based study from Finland, 61.1% of respondents felt that it had saved the lives of some children when the other treatments had failed. No study reported any adverse effect attributable to use of levosimendan. In conclusion, the above studies were in favour of levosimendan as a safe and feasible drug providing potential clinical benefit in low cardiac output syndrome (LCOS) and post-cardiac surgeries when other vasoactive drugs were insufficient to maintain stable haemodynamics. A small sample size was indeed a limitation in all the above studies. Furthermore, it is best used as a rescue drug on a named-patient basis. A small sample size was indeed a limitation in all the above studies. Larger, well-designed trials are required to further evaluate the efficacy and feasibility of levosimendan in paediatric heart failure and post-cardiac surgeries.