Login
Search
Search
0 Dates
2024
2023
2022
2021
2020
2019
2018
0 Events
CPC 2018
CPC 2019
Curso de Atualização em Medicina Cardiovascular 2019
Reunião Anual Conjunta dos Grupos de Estudo de Cirurgia Cardíaca, Doenças Valvulares e Ecocardiografia da SPC
CPC 2020
CPC 2021
CPC 2022
CPC 2023
CPC 2024
0 Topics
A. Basics
B. Imaging
C. Arrhythmias and Device Therapy
D. Heart Failure
E. Coronary Artery Disease, Acute Coronary Syndromes, Acute Cardiac Care
F. Valvular, Myocardial, Pericardial, Pulmonary, Congenital Heart Disease
G. Aortic Disease, Peripheral Vascular Disease, Stroke
H. Interventional Cardiology and Cardiovascular Surgery
I. Hypertension
J. Preventive Cardiology
K. Cardiovascular Disease In Special Populations
L. Cardiovascular Pharmacology
M. Cardiovascular Nursing
N. E-Cardiology / Digital Health, Public Health, Health Economics, Research Methodology
O. Basic Science
P. Other
0 Themes
01. History of Cardiology
02. Clinical Skills
03. Imaging
04. Arrhythmias, General
05. Atrial Fibrillation
06. Supraventricular Tachycardia (non-AF)
07. Syncope and Bradycardia
08. Ventricular Arrhythmias and Sudden Cardiac Death (SCD)
09. Device Therapy
10. Chronic Heart Failure
11. Acute Heart Failure
12. Coronary Artery Disease (Chronic)
13. Acute Coronary Syndromes
14. Acute Cardiac Care
15. Valvular Heart Disease
16. Infective Endocarditis
17. Myocardial Disease
18. Pericardial Disease
19. Tumors of the Heart
20. Congenital Heart Disease and Pediatric Cardiology
21. Pulmonary Circulation, Pulmonary Embolism, Right Heart Failure
22. Aortic Disease
23. Peripheral Vascular and Cerebrovascular Disease
24. Stroke
25. Interventional Cardiology
26. Cardiovascular Surgery
27. Hypertension
28. Risk Factors and Prevention
29. Rehabilitation and Sports Cardiology
30. Cardiovascular Disease in Special Populations
31. Pharmacology and Pharmacotherapy
32. Cardiovascular Nursing
33. e-Cardiology / Digital Health
34. Public Health and Health Economics
35. Research Methodology
36. Basic Science
37. Miscellanea
0 Resources
Abstract
Slides
Vídeo
Report
CLEAR FILTERS
Vasodilator challenge with levosimendan as alternative to nitric oxide in advanced heart failure heart transplant candidates
Session:
Posters 1 - Écran 9 - Insuficiência Cardíaca
Speaker:
Marta Tavares da Silva
Congress:
CPC 2019
Topic:
D. Heart Failure
Theme:
10. Chronic Heart Failure
Subtheme:
10.7 Chronic Heart Failure - Other
Session Type:
Posters
FP Number:
---
Authors:
Marta Tavares Da Silva; André Lourenço; Rui Rodrigues; Ricardo Lopes; JOAO SILVA; Domingos Magalhães; Roberto Pinto; Sandra Amorim; José Pinheiro Torres; Silva Cardoso; Adelino Leite-Moreira; Maria Júlia Maciel Barbosa
Abstract
<p>Introduction</p> <p>Vasodilator challenge (VC) during right heart catheterization in heart transplant (HTx) candidates is warranted whenever pulmonary artery (PA) systolic pressure ≥ 50 mmHg and either transpulmonary gradient (TPG) ≥ 15 mmHg or pulmonary vascular resistance (PVR) >3 WU as long as systolic arterial blood pressure >85 mmHg. Nitric oxide (NO) remains the mainstay but in doubtful cases a 24-48h course of diuretics, inotropes and vasoactive agents may be required. Our aim is to report our centre’s experience with levosimendan (LEVO) as alternative to NO in VC in HTx candidates due to advanced heart failure (HF).</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>VC records with either NO (20 ppm for 5–10 mins) or within 72h of LEVO infusion (12 mg/kg/min for 24-48h) carried out between 2009 and September 2018 were retrieved from the centre’s database. Analysis was carried out with Fisher’s exact test or Student’s t-test for categorical and continuous variables, respectively, or the equivalent non-parametric test for non-normal distribution variables. Data are presented as counts and percentage, or mean ± standard deviation and median, percentile 25-75, for categorical and continuous variables, respectively.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Baseline demographic and clinical characteristics from 26 patients (NO=13; LEVO=13) were similar between groups (12% female; 54 ± 10 years of age; left ventricular ejection fraction 20 ± 7%; BNP 1550 ± 1090 pg/mL; 88% on NYHA III-IV). Although no differences were observed in baseline cardiac index (CI, 1.6 ± 0.3 vs 1.4 ± 0.4 L/min.m-2, in NO and LEVO, respectively), LEVO patients showed higher right ventricular systolic (70 ± 10 vs 60 ± 13 mmHg; p=0.036) and diastolic pressures (16 ± 4 vs 11 ± 5 mmHg; p=0.009) and lower PA compliance (0.9 ± 0.2 vs 1.3 ± 0.4 ml/mmHg; p=0.007) as well as a trend for increased PA wedge pressure (26 ± 4 vs 21 ± 4 mmHg; p=0.09), translating worse hemodynamics. Upon VC only LEVO decreased PA pressure and the increase in CI was higher compared with NO (2.5 ± 0.8 vs 1.9 ± 0.5 L/min.m<sup>-2</sup>, p=0.004) thus PVR reduction was comparable between groups (7.8 ± 2.7 to 4.7 ± 1.8 vs 6.3 ± 2.3 to 3.6 ± 2.1 WU, respectively). Also, only LEVO increased right (497, 387-837 to 791, 570-946 mmHg.mL.m<sup>-2</sup>; p= 0.006) and left ventricular stroke work index (895, 807-1364 to 1257, 1107-2957 mmHg.mL.m<sup>-2</sup>; p= 0.005), and cardiac power output (0.4 ± 0.1 to 0.6 ± 0.1 W; p<0.001). Increase in PA compliance was also higher in LEVO (89 ± 98 vs 22 ± 30 ?%, p=0.04). On the other hand, NO increased wedge pressure whereas LEVO had no effect thus TPG reduction was higher with NO (42 ± 24% vs 17 ± 27% drops, respectively; p=0.022). After HTx (NO=4; LEVO=10) mortality was similar in both groups (25% vs 30%; p=1.000).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>LEVO is a safe and effective alternative in PVR reduction for VC. Its positive inotropic effect and long-lasting hemodynamic improvement may improve clinical status before HTx and allow better scrutiny of suitable candidates.</p>
Slides
Our mission: To reduce the burden of cardiovascular disease
Visit our site