Bruno Levy1,2,3, Julie Buzon1,2,3, Antoine Kimmoun1,2,3. 1. Service de Réanimation Médicale Brabois, CHRU Nancy, Pôle Cardio-Médico-Chirurgical. 2. INSERM U1116, Faculté de Médecine. 3. Université de Lorraine, Nancy, France.
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Data and interventional trials regarding vasopressor and inotrope use during cardiogenic shock are scarce. Their use is limited by their side-effects and the lack of solid evidence regarding their effectiveness in improving outcomes. In this article, we review the current use of vasopressor and inotrope agents during cardiogenic shock. RECENT FINDINGS: Two recent Cochrane analyses concluded that there was not sufficient evidence to prove that any one vasopressor or inotrope was superior to another in terms of mortality. A recent RCT and a meta-analysis on individual data suggested that norepinephrine may be preferred over epinephrine in patients with cardiogenic shock . For inotrope agents, when norepinephrine fails to restore perfusion, dobutamine represents the first-line agent. Levosimendan is a calcium sensitizer agent, which improves acute hemodynamics, albeit with uncertain effects on mortality. SUMMARY: When blood pressure needs to be restored, norepinephrine is a reasonable first-line agent. Dobutamine is the first-line inotrope agent wheraes levosimendan can be used as a second-line agent or preferentially in patients previously treated with beta-blockers. Current information regarding comparative effective outcomes is nonetheless sparse and their use should be limited as a temporary bridge to recovery, mechanical circulatory support or heart transplantation.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Data and interventional trials regarding vasopressor and inotrope use during cardiogenic shock are scarce. Their use is limited by their side-effects and the lack of solid evidence regarding their effectiveness in improving outcomes. In this article, we review the current use of vasopressor and inotrope agents during cardiogenic shock. RECENT FINDINGS: Two recent Cochrane analyses concluded that there was not sufficient evidence to prove that any one vasopressor or inotrope was superior to another in terms of mortality. A recent RCT and a meta-analysis on individual data suggested that norepinephrine may be preferred over epinephrine in patients with cardiogenic shock . For inotrope agents, when norepinephrine fails to restore perfusion, dobutamine represents the first-line agent. Levosimendan is a calcium sensitizer agent, which improves acute hemodynamics, albeit with uncertain effects on mortality. SUMMARY: When blood pressure needs to be restored, norepinephrine is a reasonable first-line agent. Dobutamine is the first-line inotrope agent wheraes levosimendan can be used as a second-line agent or preferentially in patients previously treated with beta-blockers. Current information regarding comparative effective outcomes is nonetheless sparse and their use should be limited as a temporary bridge to recovery, mechanical circulatory support or heart transplantation.
Authors: Benjamin Hibbert; Bram Rochwerg; Shannon M Fernando; Rebecca Mathew; Behnam Sadeghirad; Daniel Brodie; Emilie P Belley-Côté; Holger Thiele; Sean van Diepen; Eddy Fan; Pietro Di Santo; Trevor Simard; Juan J Russo; Alexandre Tran; Bruno Lévy; Alain Combes Journal: Can J Anaesth Date: 2022-10-04 Impact factor: 6.713
Authors: Benjamin Pequignot; Mickael Lescroart; Sophie Orlowski; Nathan Reynette; Bana Martini; Eliane Albuisson; Héloise Pina; N'Guyen Tran; Daniel Grandmougin; Bruno Levy Journal: J Clin Med Date: 2022-04-29 Impact factor: 4.964
Authors: Juan José Jiménez-Rivera; Andrea Álvarez-Castillo; Jorge Ferrer-Rodríguez; José Luis Iribarren-Sarrías; Martín Jesús García-González; Pablo Jorge-Pérez; Juan Lacalzada-Almeida; Rosalía Pérez-Hernández; Javier Montoto-López; Rafael Martínez-Sanz Journal: J Cardiothorac Surg Date: 2020-05-24 Impact factor: 1.637
Authors: Bruno Levy; Caroline Fritz; Caroline Piona; Kevin Duarte; Andrea Morelli; Philippe Guerci; Antoine Kimmoun; Nicolas Girerd Journal: Crit Care Date: 2021-01-07 Impact factor: 9.097
Authors: Thomas W L Scheeren; Jan Bakker; Thomas Kaufmann; Djillali Annane; Pierre Asfar; E Christiaan Boerma; Maurizio Cecconi; Michelle S Chew; Bernard Cholley; Maria Cronhjort; Daniel De Backer; Arnaldo Dubin; Martin W Dünser; Jacques Duranteau; Anthony C Gordon; Ludhmila A Hajjar; Olfa Hamzaoui; Glenn Hernandez; Vanina Kanoore Edul; Geert Koster; Giovanni Landoni; Marc Leone; Bruno Levy; Claude Martin; Alexandre Mebazaa; Xavier Monnet; Andrea Morelli; Didier Payen; Rupert M Pearse; Michael R Pinsky; Peter Radermacher; Daniel A Reuter; Yasser Sakr; Michael Sander; Bernd Saugel; Mervyn Singer; Pierre Squara; Antoine Vieillard-Baron; Philippe Vignon; Jean-Louis Vincent; Iwan C C van der Horst; Simon T Vistisen; Jean-Louis Teboul Journal: Ann Intensive Care Date: 2021-01-29 Impact factor: 6.925