Comparative Effectiveness and Safety of Milrinone and Levosimendan as Initial Inotrope Therapy in Patients With Acute Heart Failure With Renal Dysfunction.

ABSTRACT: Levosimendan and milrinone are 2 effective inotropic drugs used to maintain cardiac output in acute heart failure (AHF). Using data from patients with AHF with and without abnormal renal function, we performed this single-center, retrospective cohort study to compare the effectiveness and safety of milrinone and levosimendan for the initial management of AHF. Patients admitted for heart failure between December 2016 and September 2019 who received levosimendan or milrinone as initial inotrope therapy in the cardiology department were identified. A total of 436 levosimendan and 417 milrinone patients with creatinine clearance (CrCl) ≥30 mL/min and 50 levosimendan and 71 milrinone patients with CrCl <30 mL/min or on dialysis were included. The primary outcome was a composite of changes in clinical status at 15 and 30 days after initial inotrope therapy discontinuation. Between subgroups of patients with CrCl ≥30 mL/min, there were no significant differences in primary outcomes; milrinone was associated with more frequent hypotension and cardiac arrhythmias during the infusion period (P < 0.01), while levosimendan was associated with more frequent cardiac arrhythmias within 48 hours after discontinuation (P < 0.05). Of the patients with CrCl <30 mL/min or on dialysis, more initial levosimendan than milrinone patients and those who switched to alternative inotropes experienced clinical worsening at 15 days and 30 days (P < 0.05). According to our results, patients with AHF with severe renal dysfunction should avoid initial inotrope therapy with levosimendan.

Levosimendan and Continuous Outpatient Support With Inotropes in Patients With Advanced Heart Failure: A Single-Centre Descriptive Study.

ABSTRACT: To describe the use of levosimendan in a quaternary referral center with a dedicated heart failure service and compare its efficacy and safety to continuous outpatient support with inotropes (COSI) among patients with advanced heart failure (AHF) who require bridge-to-decision (BTD) or bridge-to-transplant (BTT) therapy. This study was a retrospective, single-center, descriptive study of patients with AHF who received either a single levosimendan infusion or COSI between 2018 and 2021. A total of 23 patients received a levosimendan infusion, and 14 were started on COSI. Three indications for levosimendan were identified: (1) to facilitate weaning of continuous inotropes, (2) to augment diuresis in cardiorenal syndrome, and (3) as first-line therapy for cardiogenic shock in selected patients. Eighty-three percent (19 of 23) of patients who received levosimendan survived to discharge, and there were few clinically significant adverse events. Overall survival at 12 months among patients who received levosimendan was 74%. No statistically significant difference in survival was observed at 12 months (P = 0.68) or beyond (P = 0.63) between patients who received levosimendan and were discharged with a plan for BTD or BTT and those who received COSI. Levosimendan is a safe and effective short-term therapy in AHF and offers comparable long-term survival to COSI in patients who require BTD or BTT therapy.

A multicenter, randomized phase III trial of hetrombopag: a novel thrombopoietin receptor agonist for the treatment of immune thrombocytopenia.

BACKGROUND: Hetrombopag, a novel thrombopoietin receptor agonist, has been found in phase I studies to increase platelet counts and reduce bleeding risks in adults with immune thrombocytopenia (ITP). This phase III study aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of hetrombopag in ITP patients. METHODS: Patients who had not responded to or had relapsed after previous treatment were treated with an initial dosage of once-daily 2.5 or 5 mg hetrombopag (defined as the HETROM-2.5 or HETROM-5 group) or with matching placebo in a randomized, double-blind, 10-week treatment period. Patients who received placebo and completed 10 weeks of treatment switched to receive eltrombopag, and patients treated with hetrombopag in the double-blind period continued hetrombopag during the following open-label 14-week treatment. The primary endpoint was the proportion of responders (defined as those achieving a platelet count of ≥ 50 × 109/L) after 8 weeks of treatment. RESULTS: The primary endpoint was achieved by significantly more patients in the HETROM-2.5 (58.9%; odds ratio [OR] 25.97, 95% confidence interval [CI] 9.83-68.63; p < 0.0001) and HETROM-5 (64.3%; OR 32.81, 95% CI 12.39-86.87; p < 0.0001) group than in the Placebo group (5.9%). Hetrombopag was also superior to placebo in achieving a platelet response and in reducing the bleeding risk and use of rescue therapy throughout 8 weeks of treatment. The durable platelet response to hetrombopag was maintained throughout 24 weeks. The most common adverse events were upper respiratory tract infection (42.2%), urinary tract infection (17.1%), immune thrombocytopenic purpura (17.1%) and hematuria (15%) with 24-week hetrombopag treatment. CONCLUSIONS: In ITP patients, hetrombopag is efficacious and well tolerated with a manageable safety profile. Trial registration Clinical trials.gov NCT03222843 , registered July 19, 2017, retrospectively registered.

Repetitive use of levosimendan in clinical practice: a case series.

Levosimendan was developed as a treatment for acute decompensation of severe heart failure (HF). Its use has evolved during recent years, and new HF treatment strategies in different settings have been developed. This case series aimed to show indications for the use of levosimendan and to discuss the treatment response in various settings. Repetitive levosimendan infusions were found to be safe and effective. They seemed to prolong the time of clinical stability, although they did not alter the eventual natural history of HF, with increasing frequency of hospitalisations and rising natriuretic peptide levels.

The PIKfyve Inhibitor Apilimod: A Double-Edged Sword against COVID-19.

The PIKfyve inhibitor apilimod is currently undergoing clinical trials for treatment of COVID-19. However, although apilimod might prevent viral invasion by inhibiting host cell proteases, the same proteases are critical for antigen presentation leading to T cell activation and there is good evidence from both in vitro studies and the clinic that apilimod blocks antiviral immune responses. We therefore warn that the immunosuppression observed in many COVID-19 patients might be aggravated by apilimod.

A phase I study of the safety and tolerability of VLX600, an Iron Chelator, in patients with refractory advanced solid tumors.

Introduction VLX600 is a novel iron chelator designed to interfere with intracellular iron metabolism, leading to inhibition of mitochondrial respiration and bioenergetic catastrophe and resultant tumor cell death. Methods We conducted a multicenter, phase 1, dose escalation study to determine the safety and adverse event profile and the maximum tolerated dose and recommended phase 2 dose of VLX600. Other endpoints included pharmacokinetics, and preliminary evidence of anti-cancer efficacy as assessed according to RECIST 1.1 criteria. VLX600 was administered intravenously on days 1, 8, and 15 of each 28-day treatment cycle. Results Nineteen patients were enrolled, and seventeen received at least one dose of VLX600. Dose increments were reduced to 50% after dose level 3 (40 mg) due to the occurrence of a grade 3 pulmonary embolism. The study was then closed early due to slow recruitment. No maximum tolerated dose (MTD) nor RP2D had been identified at the time of study closure. Overall, the drug was well tolerated and no DLTs were observed. Fourteen patients experienced drug-related adverse events of any grade. The most frequently reported drug-related AEs were fatigue, nausea, constipation, vomiting, increased alkaline phosphatase, anemia, and decreased appetite. No formal efficacy or survival analyses were performed. No objective responses were observed, though six patients (32%) had stable disease as best response. Conclusion VLX600 was reasonably well tolerated and, together with preclinical data, there is support for further efforts to explore its activity as single agent and in combination with drugs or radiation.

Use of levosimendan in the treatment of cerebral vascular vasospasm: a case study.

Despite the progress in the management of cerebral arterial aneurysms, subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) remains the major cause of neurological disability. While SAH-related deaths usually occur as a result of brain impairment due to hemorrhage, permanent neurological deficits are caused by cerebral ischemia due to edema and spasm of cerebral arteries. Additionally, ~20%-30% of patients with SAH develop secondary cardiomyopathy; this phenomenon is known as neurogenic stress cardiomyopathy (NSC), which is associated with increased mortality and poor long-term prognosis. Levosimendan is a new inotropic drug that causes calcium sensitization of troponin C, thus increasing contraction force of myofilaments. The drug also causes opening of ATP-dependent potassium channels in vascular smooth muscles, which results in dilatation of veins and arteries, including cerebral arteries. To date, there have been several reports of levosimendan application in patients with SAH and neurogenic stress cardiomyopathy, and the effect of the drug on vasospasm has been previously advocated. This paper presents a case report of a 57-year-old patient with massive SAH, where levosimendan was used for reducing vasospasm.

Effect of Levosimendan on Low Cardiac Output Syndrome in Patients With Low Ejection Fraction Undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting With Cardiopulmonary Bypass: The LICORN Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Low cardiac output syndrome after cardiac surgery is associated with high morbidity and mortality in patients with impaired left ventricular function. Objective: To assess the ability of preoperative levosimendan to prevent postoperative low cardiac output syndrome. Design, Setting, and Participants: Randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial conducted in 13 French cardiac surgical centers. Patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction less than or equal to 40% and scheduled for isolated or combined coronary artery bypass grafting with cardiopulmonary bypass were enrolled from June 2013 until May 2015 and followed during 6 months (last follow-up, November 30, 2015). Interventions: Patients were assigned to a 24-hour infusion of levosimendan 0.1 µg/kg/min (n = 167) or placebo (n = 168) initiated after anesthetic induction. Main Outcomes and Measures: Composite end point reflecting low cardiac output syndrome with need for a catecholamine infusion 48 hours after study drug initiation, need for a left ventricular mechanical assist device or failure to wean from it at 96 hours after study drug initiation when the device was inserted preoperatively, or need for renal replacement therapy at any time postoperatively. It was hypothesized that levosimendan would reduce the incidence of this composite end point by 15% in comparison with placebo. Results: Among 336 randomized patients (mean age, 68 years; 16% women), 333 completed the trial. The primary end point occurred in 87 patients (52%) in the levosimendan group and 101 patients (61%) in the placebo group (absolute risk difference taking into account center effect, -7% [95% CI, -17% to 3%]; P = .15). Predefined subgroup analyses found no interaction with ejection fraction less than 30%, type of surgery, and preoperative use of ß-blockers, intra-aortic balloon pump, or catecholamines. The prevalence of hypotension (57% vs 48%), atrial fibrillation (50% vs 40%), and other adverse events did not significantly differ between levosimendan and placebo. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with low ejection fraction who were undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting with cardiopulmonary bypass, levosimendan compared with placebo did not result in a significant difference in the composite end point of prolonged catecholamine infusion, use of left ventricular mechanical assist device, or renal replacement therapy. These findings do not support the use of levosimendan for this indication. Trial Registration: EudraCT Number: 2012-000232-25; clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT02184819.

Aldoxorubicin for the treatment of soft tissue sarcoma.

Intoduction: Soft tissue sarcomas (STS) encompass a group of rare tumors arising from mesenchymal tissue. Traditionally, anthracycline-based chemotherapy, with doxorubicin, is the main treatment for advanced STS. Areas covered: Aldoxorubicin is a doxorubicin derivative containing a carboxylic hydrazone and serves as a prodrug of doxorubicin. It covalently binds to albumin in the blood until reaching the acidic tumor environment, which dissolves the hydrazone linker, thus releasing doxorubicin into the tissue. In this review paper, we analyze the pharmacokinetics, current phase I, phase II, and phase III trials, as well as adverse effect profile of aldoxorubicin in patients with advanced STS. Expert opinion: Aldoxorubicin represents a promising drug for treatment of sarcomas. The drug has minimal cardiac toxicity, which represents a significant advantage to doxorubicin. Preliminary phase 3 study results demonstrate PFS advantage in patients with leiomyosarcoma and liposarcoma. However, more studies are needed to establish the role of aldoxorubicin in sarcoma treatment.

Efficacy and safety of levosimendan in patients with acute right heart failure: A meta-analysis.

AIMS: Right heart failure (RHF), which is caused by a variety of heart and lung diseases, has a high morbidity and mortality rate. Levosimendan is a cardiac inotropic drug and vasodilator. The effect of levosimendan on RHF remains unclear. We sought to evaluate the efficacy and safety of levosimendan in patients with acute RHF. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We systematically searched PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and ClinicalTrials.gov to identify studies reporting the efficacy and safety of levosimendan for the treatment of RHF. KEY FINDINGS: Ten trials, including 359 participants from 6 RCTs and 4 self-controlled trials, were evaluated. In the 6 RCTs, we found that patients treated with levosimendan for 24h showed a significant increase in tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion [1.53; 95% CI (0.54, 2.53); P=0.002] and ejection fraction [3.59; 95% CI (1.21, 5.98); P=0.003] as well as a significant reduction in systolic pulmonary artery pressure [-6.15; 95% CI (-9.29, -3.02); P=0.0001] and pulmonary vascular resistance [-39.48; 95% CI (-65.59, -13.38); P=0.003], whereas changes in mean pulmonary pressure were nonsignificant. Adverse events did not significantly differ between the two groups. SIGNIFICANCE: Our study shows that levosimendan exhibits short-term efficacy for treating RHF in patients with a variety of heart and lung diseases. Additional strict multicentre RCTs with long follow-up times and large sample sizes are required to further validate the efficacy and safety of this treatment.

Effects of Levosimendan on Patients with Heart Failure Complicating Acute Coronary Syndrome: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: The prognosis for patients with heart failure (HF), including cardiogenic shock (CS), complicating acute coronary syndrome (ACS) remains poor. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to review the relevant literature and evaluate whether levosimendan was associated with better clinical outcomes in these patients. METHODS: We searched PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane library databases for randomized controlled trials that investigated levosimendan compared with any control in patients with HF/CS complicating ACS. RESULTS: A total of 1065 patients from nine trials were included in this study. Analysis showed that levosimendan significantly reduced total mortality and the incidence of worsening HF. In patients with HF-ACS, levosimendan was associated with reduced mortality. In patients with CS-ACS, no significant difference was observed between the two groups. Levosimendan contributed to significantly reduced mortality when compared with placebo, but no significant reduction was seen compared with dobutamine. Compared with controls, levosimendan decreased pulmonary capillary wedge pressure and systemic vascular resistance and increased cardiac index, with no significant difference observed between the groups in terms of heart rate. Levosimendan non-significantly increased the risk of hypotension but did not increase the risk of ischemic episodes, sinus tachycardia, atrial fibrillation, or ventricular arrhythmias. CONCLUSION: Levosimendan appears to be a promising drug to reduce mortality and worsening HF in patients with HF/CS-ACS. It appears to provide hemodynamic benefit and was associated with an increased risk of hypotension.

Taxane-Platin-Resistant Lung Cancers Co-develop Hypersensitivity to JumonjiC Demethylase Inhibitors.

Although non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) patients benefit from standard taxane-platin chemotherapy, many relapse, developing drug resistance. We established preclinical taxane-platin-chemoresistance models and identified a 35-gene resistance signature, which was associated with poor recurrence-free survival in neoadjuvant-treated NSCLC patients and included upregulation of the JumonjiC lysine demethylase KDM3B. In fact, multi-drug-resistant cells progressively increased the expression of many JumonjiC demethylases, had altered histone methylation, and, importantly, showed hypersensitivity to JumonjiC inhibitors in vitro and in vivo. Increasing taxane-platin resistance in progressive cell line series was accompanied by progressive sensitization to JIB-04 and GSK-J4. These JumonjiC inhibitors partly reversed deregulated transcriptional programs, prevented the emergence of drug-tolerant colonies from chemo-naive cells, and synergized with standard chemotherapy in vitro and in vivo. Our findings reveal JumonjiC inhibitors as promising therapies for targeting taxane-platin-chemoresistant NSCLCs.

Levosimendan for Hemodynamic Support after Cardiac Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Acute left ventricular dysfunction is a major complication of cardiac surgery and is associated with increased mortality. Meta-analyses of small trials suggest that levosimendan may result in a higher rate of survival among patients undergoing cardiac surgery. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving patients in whom perioperative hemodynamic support was indicated after cardiac surgery, according to prespecified criteria. Patients were randomly assigned to receive levosimendan (in a continuous infusion at a dose of 0.025 to 0.2 µg per kilogram of body weight per minute) or placebo, for up to 48 hours or until discharge from the intensive care unit (ICU), in addition to standard care. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. RESULTS: The trial was stopped for futility after 506 patients were enrolled. A total of 248 patients were assigned to receive levosimendan and 258 to receive placebo. There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality between the levosimendan group and the placebo group (32 patients [12.9%] and 33 patients [12.8%], respectively; absolute risk difference, 0.1 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], -5.7 to 5.9; P=0.97). There were no significant differences between the levosimendan group and the placebo group in the durations of mechanical ventilation (median, 19 hours and 21 hours, respectively; median difference, -2 hours; 95% CI, -5 to 1; P=0.48), ICU stay (median, 72 hours and 84 hours, respectively; median difference, -12 hours; 95% CI, -21 to 2; P=0.09), and hospital stay (median, 14 days and 14 days, respectively; median difference, 0 days; 95% CI, -1 to 2; P=0.39). There was no significant difference between the levosimendan group and the placebo group in rates of hypotension or cardiac arrhythmias. CONCLUSIONS: In patients who required perioperative hemodynamic support after cardiac surgery, low-dose levosimendan in addition to standard care did not result in lower 30-day mortality than placebo. (Funded by the Italian Ministry of Health; CHEETAH ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00994825 .).

Levosimendan in Patients with Left Ventricular Dysfunction Undergoing Cardiac Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Levosimendan is an inotropic agent that has been shown in small studies to prevent or treat the low cardiac output syndrome after cardiac surgery. METHODS: In a multicenter, randomized, placebo-controlled, phase 3 trial, we evaluated the efficacy and safety of levosimendan in patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction of 35% or less who were undergoing cardiac surgery with the use of cardiopulmonary bypass. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either intravenous levosimendan (at a dose of 0.2 µg per kilogram of body weight per minute for 1 hour, followed by a dose of 0.1 µg per kilogram per minute for 23 hours) or placebo, with the infusion started before surgery. The two primary end points were a four-component composite of death through day 30, renal-replacement therapy through day 30, perioperative myocardial infarction through day 5, or use of a mechanical cardiac assist device through day 5; and a two-component composite of death through day 30 or use of a mechanical cardiac assist device through day 5. RESULTS: A total of 882 patients underwent randomization, 849 of whom received levosimendan or placebo and were included in the modified intention-to-treat population. The four-component primary end point occurred in 105 of 428 patients (24.5%) assigned to receive levosimendan and in 103 of 421 (24.5%) assigned to receive placebo (adjusted odds ratio, 1.00; 99% confidence interval [CI], 0.66 to 1.54; P=0.98). The two-component primary end point occurred in 56 patients (13.1%) assigned to receive levosimendan and in 48 (11.4%) assigned to receive placebo (adjusted odds ratio, 1.18; 96% CI, 0.76 to 1.82; P=0.45). The rate of adverse events did not differ significantly between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic levosimendan did not result in a rate of the short-term composite end point of death, renal-replacement therapy, perioperative myocardial infarction, or use of a mechanical cardiac assist device that was lower than the rate with placebo among patients with a reduced left ventricular ejection fraction who were undergoing cardiac surgery with the use of cardiopulmonary bypass. (Funded by Tenax Therapeutics; LEVO-CTS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02025621 .).

Effects of Levosimendan on Cellular Metabolic Alterations in Patients With Septic Shock: A Randomized Controlled Pilot Study.

INTRODUCTION: Mitochondrial dysfunction and consequent cellular energetic failure play a key role in the development of sepsis-related organs failure. Evidence suggests that the pleiotropic effects of levosimendan may positively affect cellular metabolism during septic shock. OBJECTIVES: To investigate changes in the concentration of glucose, lactate, pyruvate, and glycerol in the extracellular fluid of the skeletal muscle following levosimendan administration in patients with septic shock. METHODS: The study was designed as a prospective, double-blind, controlled, clinical pilot trial and performed in a multidisciplinary intensive care unit. After achieving normovolemia and a mean arterial pressure of at least 65 mm Hg, 20 septic shock patients were randomized to receive either levosimendan 0.2 µg/kg/min (n = 10), or dobutamine 5 µg/kg/min as active comparator (n = 10). Interstitial tissue concentrations of lactate, pyruvate, glucose, and glycerol were obtained by using muscle microdialysis. All measurements, including data from right heart catheterization, were obtained at baseline and every 6 h for the following 72 h after randomization.The trial is registered with Clinicaltrials.gov, number NCT02963454. RESULTS: Compared with dobutamine, levosimendan increased interstitial tissue pyruvate concentration (153.3 ±â€Š73 and 187. 2 ±â€Š13.5 vs. 210.7 ±â€Š76.2 and 161 ±â€Š64.6; P < 0.05), and lactate clearance (55 vs. 10). Lactate/pyruvate ratio was lower in the levosimendan group at the end of study period (37. 7 ±â€Š18.9 and 29.3 ±â€Š12.7 vs. 10.9 ±â€Š4.5 and 31.4 ±â€Š13. 2; P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Although we investigated a small number of patients, our preliminary results suggest that levosimendan may improve cellular metabolic alterations in patients with septic shock.

Acute infusion of levosimendan enhances atrial fibrillation in an experimental whole-heart model.

BACKGROUND: The calcium sensitizer levosimendan is clinically employed in decompensated heart failure. The aim of the present study was to assess effects of levosimendan on atrial electrophysiology in an experimental whole-heart model. METHODS AND RESULTS: 13 rabbit hearts were isolated and Langendorff-perfused. Thereafter, hearts were paced at cycle lengths of 350ms, 250ms and 200ms in the atrium. A standardized protocol employing atrial burst pacing induced atrial fibrillation (AF) in 4 of 13 hearts under baseline conditions (mean: 3.3±2.1 episodes). Subsequently, levosimendan was administered in two concentrations (0.25µM, 0.5µM). Two monophasic action potential recordings on the left- and two on the right atrial epicardium displayed a decrease of atrial action potential duration (aAPD, -27ms, p<0.05) and atrial effective refractory period (aERP; -29ms, p<0.05) under the influence of 0.5µM levosimendan. The described alterations of atrial electrophysiology led to and increased inducibility of AF. Of note, treatment with 0.25µM levosimendan resulted in induction of AF in 11 of 13 hearts (mean: 8.9±3.5 episodes). Under the influence of 0.5µM levosimendan 12 of 13 hearts were inducible (mean: 9.8±3.8 episodes). CONCLUSION: In the present study acute infusion of levosimendan in isolated rabbit hearts resulted in an abbreviation of atrial action potential duration and a reduction of aERP. This led to a significantly elevated inducibility of atrial fibrillation. These results suggest a proarrhythmic effect of levosimendan regarding atrial fibrillation. This aspect should be further investigated in the clinical setting.

Levosimendan in patients with left ventricular systolic dysfunction undergoing cardiac surgery on cardiopulmonary bypass: Rationale and study design of the Levosimendan in Patients with Left Ventricular Systolic Dysfunction Undergoing Cardiac Surgery Requiring Cardiopulmonary Bypass (LEVO-CTS) trial.

BACKGROUND: Low cardiac output syndrome is associated with increased mortality and occurs in 3% to 14% of patients undergoing cardiac surgery on cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). Levosimendan, a novel calcium sensitizer and KATP channel activator with inotropic, vasodilatory, and cardioprotective properties, has shown significant promise in reducing the incidence of low cardiac output syndrome and related adverse outcomes in patients undergoing cardiac surgery on CPB. METHODS: LEVO-CTS is a phase 3 randomized, controlled, multicenter study evaluating the efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of levosimendan in reducing morbidity and mortality in high-risk patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (≤35%) undergoing cardiac surgery on CPB. Patients will be randomly assigned to receive either intravenous levosimendan (0.2 µg kg-1 min-1 for the first hour followed by 0.1 µg/kg for 23hours) or matching placebo initiated within 8hours of surgery. The co-primary end points are (1) the composite of death or renal replacement therapy through day 30 or perioperative myocardial infarction, or mechanical assist device use through day 5 (quad end point tested at α<.01), and (2) the composite of death through postoperative day 30 or mechanical assist device use through day 5 (dual end point tested at α<.04). Safety end points include new atrial fibrillation and death through 90days. In addition, an economic analysis will address the cost-effectiveness of levosimendan compared with placebo in high-risk patients undergoing cardiac surgery on CPB. Approximately 880 patients will be enrolled at approximately 60 sites in the United States and Canada between July 2014 and September 2016, with results anticipated in January 2017. CONCLUSION: LEVO-CTS, a large randomized multicenter clinical trial, will evaluate the efficacy, safety, and cost-effectiveness of levosimendan in reducing adverse outcomes in high-risk patients undergoing cardiac surgery on CPB. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02025621).

Impact of prophylactic administration of Levosimendan on short-term and long-term outcome in high-risk patients with severely reduced left-ventricular ejection fraction undergoing cardiac surgery - a retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: Patients with severely reduced left-ventricular ejection fraction carry a high risk of morbidity and mortality after cardiac surgery. Levosimendan can be used prophylactically in these patients having shown positive effects on short-term outcome. However, effects on long-term outcome and patient subgroups benefiting the most are unknown. We aim to address these topics with real-life data from our clinical practice. METHODS: Two hundred eigthy eight patients with preoperative LVEF ≤ 35% underwent cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass between 2009 and 2013. Thereof, 246 were included in the matched analysis. Eigthy two patients received 12.5mg Levosimendan starting at induction of anesthesia. Outcomes of patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting surgery (n = 103), isolated valve surgery/ascending aortic surgery (n = 45) and those undergoing combination procedures (n = 98) were analyzed separately. Additionally, multivariate regression analysis was conducted in order to identify predictors of short-term outcome parameters for different subgroups of patients. RESULTS: Thirty days mortality rates of 16% in the Levosimendan group and 21% in the control group (OR 0.7; 95%-CI 0.36-1.5; p = 0.37) were observed. Levosimendan showed a positive effect on postoperative renal function. A higher rate of new-onset atrial fibrillation (OR 4.0; 95%-CI 2.2-7-2; p < 0.0001) was observed in the Levosimendan group. Follow-up until three years postoperatively showed no differences in long-term survival between the groups. CONCLUSION: Prophylactic administration of Levosimendan did not affect overall short- and long-term outcomes. The value of prophylactic use of Levosimendan remains questionable and more data is needed to confirm subgroups that might benefit most.