محمد أحمد جوده الجزار
أستاذ مساعد
The Preoperative Use of Levosimendan in Patients undergoing Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery with Low Ejection Fraction
The Egyptian Cardiothoracic Surgeon • 2021
معلومات البحث
المؤلفون
Basem Abdelgawad, Yousry Shahin, Anhar Abd-Ellatif, Mohamed Abdelrahman, Mohamed Ali, Ahmed El sayad, Mohamed Elgazzar
الكلمات المفتاحية
Levosimendan; Low cardiac output; Myocardial ischemia
المجلة العلمية
The Egyptian Cardiothoracic Surgeon
الناشر
Not Available
المجلد
Not Available
العدد
Not Available
الصفحات
Not Available
publication.type
Local
رابط البحث
Open Link
المواد المرفقة
Not Available
الملخص
Background: Levosimendan is a calcium sensitizer with positive inotropic, vasodilatory, and cardioprotective actions. Levosimendan infusion time may affect the outcomes. Our objective was to evaluate its efficacy and safety when used before coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) in patients with low ejection fraction.
Methods: This prospective observational study included 150 CABG patients with ejection fraction ≤ 40% divided into two groups. In the Levosimendan group (n= 75), it was given preoperatively, and in the conventional group (n= 75), myocardial support was used if indicated.
Results: Operative time (344±28.7 vs. 421.4±34.5 min) and cardiopulmonary bypass time (97±17.4 vs. 127.4±24.5) were significantly shorter in the Levosimendan group (P˂ 0.001, for both). Failure to wean from bypass (13 (17.3%) vs. 23 (30.7%), P=0.06) and the need for intra-aortic balloon pump (6 (8%) vs. 14 (18.7%), P= 0.06) were non significantly lower in the Levosimendan group. The mechanical ventilation duration (12±3.3 vs. 19.6±4.7 h, P= 0.04) and ICU stay (3.8±1.2 vs. 5.3±1.4 days, P ˂ 0.001) were lower with levosimendan. Mortality was non-significantly lower in the Levosimendan group (10 (13.3%) vs. 18 (24%), P= 0.09). There were no differences in atrial and ventricular arrhythmias between groups.
Conclusion: The preoperative use of levosimendan could improve the outcomes in patients undergoing CABG with low ejection fraction. Levosimendan complication profile was comparable to the conventional approach
Methods: This prospective observational study included 150 CABG patients with ejection fraction ≤ 40% divided into two groups. In the Levosimendan group (n= 75), it was given preoperatively, and in the conventional group (n= 75), myocardial support was used if indicated.
Results: Operative time (344±28.7 vs. 421.4±34.5 min) and cardiopulmonary bypass time (97±17.4 vs. 127.4±24.5) were significantly shorter in the Levosimendan group (P˂ 0.001, for both). Failure to wean from bypass (13 (17.3%) vs. 23 (30.7%), P=0.06) and the need for intra-aortic balloon pump (6 (8%) vs. 14 (18.7%), P= 0.06) were non significantly lower in the Levosimendan group. The mechanical ventilation duration (12±3.3 vs. 19.6±4.7 h, P= 0.04) and ICU stay (3.8±1.2 vs. 5.3±1.4 days, P ˂ 0.001) were lower with levosimendan. Mortality was non-significantly lower in the Levosimendan group (10 (13.3%) vs. 18 (24%), P= 0.09). There were no differences in atrial and ventricular arrhythmias between groups.
Conclusion: The preoperative use of levosimendan could improve the outcomes in patients undergoing CABG with low ejection fraction. Levosimendan complication profile was comparable to the conventional approach
