Levosimendan: current data, clinical use and future development.

Levosimendan is an inodilator indicated for the short-term treatment of acutely decompensated severe chronic heart failure, and in situations where conventional therapy is not considered adequate. The principal pharmacological effects of levosimendan are (a) increased cardiac contractility by calcium sensitisation of troponin C, (b) vasodilation, and (c) cardioprotection. These last two effects are related to the opening of sarcolemmal and mitochondrial potassium-ATP channels, respectively. Data from clinical trials indicate that levosimendan improves haemodynamics with no attendant significant increase in cardiac oxygen consumption and relieves symptoms of acute heart failure; these effects are not impaired or attenuated by the concomitant use of beta-blockers. Levosimendan also has favourable effects on neurohormone levels in heart failure patients. Levosimendan is generally well tolerated in acute heart failure patients: the most common adverse events encountered in this setting are hypotension, headache, atrial fibrillation, hypokalaemia and tachycardia. Levosimendan has also been studied in other therapeutic applications, particularly cardiac surgery - in which it has shown a range of beneficial haemodynamic and cardioprotective effects, and a favourable influence on clinical outcomes - and has been evaluated in repetitive dosing protocols in patients with advanced chronic heart failure. Levosimendan has shown preliminary positive effects in a range of conditions requiring inotropic support, including right ventricular failure, cardiogenic shock, septic shock, and Takotsubo cardiomyopathy

Direct intra-abdominal pressure monitoring via piezoresistive pressure measurement: a technical note

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Piezoresistive pressure measurement technique (PRM) has previously been applied for direct IAP measurement in a porcine model using two different devices. Aim of this clinical study was to assess both devices regarding complications, reliability and agreement with IVP in patients undergoing elective abdominal surgery.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A prospective cohort study was performed in 20 patients randomly scheduled to receive PRM either by a Coach^®-probe or an Accurate++^®-probe (both MIPM, Mammendorf, Germany). Probes were placed on the greater omentum and passed through the abdominal wall paralleling routine drainages. PRM was compared with IVP measurement by t-testing and by calculating mean difference as well as limits of agreement (LA).</p> <p>Results</p> <p>There were no probe related complications. Due to technical limitations, data could be collected in 3/10 patients with Coach^®and in 7/10 patients with Accurate++^®. Analysis was carried out only for Accurate++^®. Mean values did not differ to mean IVP values. Mean difference to IVP was 0.1 ± 2.8 mmHg (LA: -5.5 to 5.6 mmHg).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Direct IAP measurement was clinically uneventful. Although results of Accurate++^®were comparable to IVP, the device might be too fragile for IAP measurements in the clinical setting. Local ethical committee trial registration: EK2024</p