OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of levosimendan, a nonadrenergic inotropic calcium sensitizer, in comparison with adrenergic dobutamine for the management of postresuscitation myocardial dysfunction following resuscitation from prolonged cardiac arrest. DESIGN: Randomized prospective animal study. SETTING: Animal research laboratory. SUBJECTS: Male Yorkshire-cross domestic pigs INTERVENTIONS: Ventricular fibrillation was induced in male domestic pigs weighing between 35 and 40 kg. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation, including precordial compression and mechanical ventilation, was started after 7 mins of untreated cardiac arrest. Electrical defibrillation was attempted after 5 mins of cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Each animal was successfully resuscitated without pharmacologic intervention. Resuscitated animals were randomized to treatment with levosimendan, dobutamine, or saline placebo. The inotropic agents or an equivalent volume of placebo diluents was administered 10 mins after restoration of spontaneous circulation. Levosimendan was administered in a loading dose of 20 microg.kg over 10 mins followed by a 220-min infusion of 0.4 microg.kg.min. Dobutamine was infused into the right atrium in an amount of 5 microg.kg.min. Treatment was continued for a total of 230 mins. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Levosimendan and dobutamine produced comparable increases in cardiac output. However, levosimendan produced significantly greater left ventricular ejection fraction and fractional area changes compared with dobutamine and saline placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Levosimendan has the potential of improving postresuscitation myocardial function. It is likely to serve as an alternative to dobutamine as an inotropic agent for management of postresuscitation myocardial dysfunction.
OBJECTIVE: To investigate the effects of levosimendan, a nonadrenergic inotropic calcium sensitizer, in comparison with adrenergic dobutamine for the management of postresuscitation myocardial dysfunction following resuscitation from prolonged cardiac arrest. DESIGN: Randomized prospective animal study. SETTING: Animal research laboratory. SUBJECTS: Male Yorkshire-cross domestic pigs INTERVENTIONS:Ventricular fibrillation was induced in male domestic pigs weighing between 35 and 40 kg. Cardiopulmonary resuscitation, including precordial compression and mechanical ventilation, was started after 7 mins of untreated cardiac arrest. Electrical defibrillation was attempted after 5 mins of cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Each animal was successfully resuscitated without pharmacologic intervention. Resuscitated animals were randomized to treatment with levosimendan, dobutamine, or saline placebo. The inotropic agents or an equivalent volume of placebo diluents was administered 10 mins after restoration of spontaneous circulation. Levosimendan was administered in a loading dose of 20 microg.kg over 10 mins followed by a 220-min infusion of 0.4 microg.kg.min. Dobutamine was infused into the right atrium in an amount of 5 microg.kg.min. Treatment was continued for a total of 230 mins. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Levosimendan and dobutamine produced comparable increases in cardiac output. However, levosimendan produced significantly greater left ventricular ejection fraction and fractional area changes compared with dobutamine and saline placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Levosimendan has the potential of improving postresuscitation myocardial function. It is likely to serve as an alternative to dobutamine as an inotropic agent for management of postresuscitation myocardial dysfunction.
Authors: Monica E Kleinman; Allan R de Caen; Leon Chameides; Dianne L Atkins; Robert A Berg; Marc D Berg; Farhan Bhanji; Dominique Biarent; Robert Bingham; Ashraf H Coovadia; Mary Fran Hazinski; Robert W Hickey; Vinay M Nadkarni; Amelia G Reis; Antonio Rodriguez-Nunez; James Tibballs; Arno L Zaritsky; David Zideman Journal: Circulation Date: 2010-10-19 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Monica E Kleinman; Allan R de Caen; Leon Chameides; Dianne L Atkins; Robert A Berg; Marc D Berg; Farhan Bhanji; Dominique Biarent; Robert Bingham; Ashraf H Coovadia; Mary Fran Hazinski; Robert W Hickey; Vinay M Nadkarni; Amelia G Reis; Antonio Rodriguez-Nunez; James Tibballs; Arno L Zaritsky; David Zideman Journal: Pediatrics Date: 2010-10-18 Impact factor: 7.124
Authors: Claudius Jacobshagen; Theresa Pelster; Anja Pax; Wiebke Horn; Stephan Schmidt-Schweda; Bernhard W Unsöld; Tim Seidler; Stephan Wagner; Gerd Hasenfuss; Lars S Maier Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2010-02-04 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Thomas W Conlon; Christine B Falkensammer; Rachel S Hammond; Vinay M Nadkarni; Robert A Berg; Alexis A Topjian Journal: Pediatr Crit Care Med Date: 2015-02 Impact factor: 3.624
Authors: Patrick Meybohm; Matthias Gruenewald; Martin Albrecht; Christina Müller; Karina Zitta; Nikola Foesel; Moritz Maracke; Sabine Tacke; Jürgen Schrezenmeir; Jens Scholz; Berthold Bein Journal: Crit Care Date: 2011-10-19 Impact factor: 9.097
Authors: Andreas García-Bardon; Jens Kamuf; Alexander Ziebart; Tanghua Liu; Nadia Krebs; Bastian Dünges; Robert F Kelm; Svenja Morsbach; Kristin Mohr; Axel Heimann; Erik K Hartmann; Serge C Thal Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2021-07-09 Impact factor: 4.379