Daniel Burkhoff1, Barry A Borlaug2, Sanjiv J Shah3, Ronald Zolty4, Ryan J Tedford5, Thenappan Thenappan6, Roham T Zamanian7, Jeremy A Mazurek8, Jonathan D Rich3, Marc A Simon9, Eugene S Chung10, Farhan Raza11, David T Majure12, Gregory D Lewis13, Ioana R Preston14, Stuart Rich3. 1. Cardiovascular Research Foundation, New York, New York, USA. Electronic address: dburkhoff@crf.org. 2. Mayo Clinic, Rochester, Minnesota. 3. Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois, USA. 4. University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, Nebraska, USA. 5. Medical University of South Carolina, Charleston, South Carolina, USA. 6. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Minnesota, USA. 7. Stanford University, Stanford, California, USA. 8. Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. 9. University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvani, USA. 10. Lindner Research Center at The Christ Hospital, Cincinnati, Ohio, USA. 11. University of Wisconsin, Madison, Wisconsin, USA. 12. North Shore University Hospital, Manhasset, New York, USA. 13. Massachusetts, General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 14. Tufts Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of intravenous levosimendan on hemodynamics and 6-min walk distance (6MWD) in patients with pulmonary hypertension and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (PH-HFpEF). BACKGROUND: There are no proven effective treatments for patients with PH-HFpEF. METHODS: Patients with mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP) ≥35 mm Hg, pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) ≥20 mm Hg, and LVEF ≥40% underwent 6MWD and hemodynamic measurements at rest, during passive leg raise, and supine cycle exercise at baseline and after an open-label 24-h levosimendan infusion (0.1 μg/kg/min). Hemodynamic responders (those with ≥4 mm Hg reduction of exercise-PCWP) were randomized (double blind) to weekly levosimendan infusion (0.075 to 0.1 ug/kg/min for 24 h) or placebo for 5 additional weeks. The primary end point was exercise-PCWP, and key secondary end points included 6MWD and PCWP measured across all exercise stages. RESULTS: Thirty-seven of 44 patients (84%) met responder criteria and were randomized to levosimendan (n = 18) or placebo (n = 19). Participants were 69 ± 9 years of age, 61% female, and with resting mPAP 41.0 ± 9.3 mm Hg and exercise-PCWP 36.8 ± 11.3 mm Hg. Compared with placebo, levosimendan did not significantly reduce the primary end point of exercise-PCWP at 6 weeks (-1.4 mm Hg; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -7.8 to 4.8; p = 0.65). However, levosimendan reduced PCWP measured across all exercise stages (-3.9 ± 2.0 mm Hg; p = 0.047). Levosimendan treatment resulted in a 29.3 m (95% CI: 2.5 to 56.1; p = 0.033) improvement in 6MWD compared with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Six weeks of once-weekly levosimendan infusion did not affect exercise-PCWP but did reduce PCWP incorporating data from rest and exercise, in tandem with increased 6MWD. Further study of levosimendan is warranted as a therapeutic option for PH-HFpEF. (Hemodynamic Evaluation of Levosimendan in Patients With PH-HFpEF [HELP]; NCT03541603).
OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of intravenous levosimendan on hemodynamics and 6-min walk distance (6MWD) in patients with pulmonary hypertension and heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (PH-HFpEF). BACKGROUND: There are no proven effective treatments for patients with PH-HFpEF. METHODS: Patients with mean pulmonary artery pressure (mPAP) ≥35 mm Hg, pulmonary capillary wedge pressure (PCWP) ≥20 mm Hg, and LVEF ≥40% underwent 6MWD and hemodynamic measurements at rest, during passive leg raise, and supine cycle exercise at baseline and after an open-label 24-h levosimendan infusion (0.1 μg/kg/min). Hemodynamic responders (those with ≥4 mm Hg reduction of exercise-PCWP) were randomized (double blind) to weekly levosimendan infusion (0.075 to 0.1 ug/kg/min for 24 h) or placebo for 5 additional weeks. The primary end point was exercise-PCWP, and key secondary end points included 6MWD and PCWP measured across all exercise stages. RESULTS: Thirty-seven of 44 patients (84%) met responder criteria and were randomized to levosimendan (n = 18) or placebo (n = 19). Participants were 69 ± 9 years of age, 61% female, and with resting mPAP 41.0 ± 9.3 mm Hg and exercise-PCWP 36.8 ± 11.3 mm Hg. Compared with placebo, levosimendan did not significantly reduce the primary end point of exercise-PCWP at 6 weeks (-1.4 mm Hg; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -7.8 to 4.8; p = 0.65). However, levosimendan reduced PCWP measured across all exercise stages (-3.9 ± 2.0 mm Hg; p = 0.047). Levosimendan treatment resulted in a 29.3 m (95% CI: 2.5 to 56.1; p = 0.033) improvement in 6MWD compared with placebo. CONCLUSIONS: Six weeks of once-weekly levosimendan infusion did not affect exercise-PCWP but did reduce PCWP incorporating data from rest and exercise, in tandem with increased 6MWD. Further study of levosimendan is warranted as a therapeutic option for PH-HFpEF. (Hemodynamic Evaluation of Levosimendan in Patients With PH-HFpEF [HELP]; NCT03541603).
Authors: Chakradhari Inampudi; Daniel Silverman; Marc A Simon; Peter J Leary; Kavita Sharma; Brian A Houston; Jean-Luc Vachiéry; Francois Haddad; Ryan J Tedford Journal: Chest Date: 2021-08-12 Impact factor: 9.410
Authors: Marat Fudim; David M Kaye; Barry A Borlaug; Sanjiv J Shah; Stuart Rich; Navin K Kapur; Maria Rosa Costanzo; Michael I Brener; Kenji Sunagawa; Daniel Burkhoff Journal: J Am Coll Cardiol Date: 2022-05-10 Impact factor: 27.203