Key result
Levosimendan is linked to lower BNP in HF with sinus rhythm but not chronic AF.
Why the study?
The effects of levosimendan on BNP and other myocardial injury indicators in heart failure patients with chronic atrial fibrillation compared to sinus rhythm were unclear.
Does levosimendan improve BNP and myocardial injury indicators differently in heart failure patients with chronic atrial fibrillation compared to those with sinus rhythm?
Observational (n=62)
Double-blind
No
Does levosimendan improve BNP and myocardial injury indicators differently in heart failure patients with chronic atrial fibrillation compared to those with sinus rhythm?
Absolute Event Rate: 1117.7% vs 894%
p-value: p=0.2 vs baseline (AF); 0.002 vs baseline (SR)
Levosimendan may have limited efficacy in reducing BNP levels in decompensated heart failure patients with concomitant atrial fibrillation compared to those with sinus rhythm.
May attenuate BNP reduction with levosimendan in AF-HF versus SR; leaves open rhythm-specific efficacy for prospective trials.
To compare effects of levosimendan on brain natriuretic factor (BNP) and other myocardial injury indicators in heart failure (HF) patients with chronic atrial fibrillation (AF) versus sinus rhythm (SR). This study was prospective, double blinded and included a total of 62 chronic HF patients in NYHA III-IV classes. Left ventricular ejection fraction £35%, and with either SR (n=38) or AF (n=24) received a 12 μg/kg dose of levosimendan. Then they were followed up by IV infusions, as tolerated. BNP, cardiac troponin I, creatinine kinase-myocardial band levels were measured. Age mean (67.5 ± 16.5 years), demographic features and medical history were not significantly different between groups. Diastolic blood pressure was lower (p=0.008), whereas blood urea nitrogen was higher (p =0.03) in the AF group. The frequently used concomitant medication in the AF group was amiodarone (p=0.02). Both systolic and diastolic blood pressures were decreased in the SR Group (p=0.009 and 0.006, respectively). Despite the reduction in systolic blood pressure (p=0.04), diastolic blood pressure remained unchanged in the AF group. Levosimendan significantly decreased BNP levels in the SR group (p=0.002). There was symptomatic improvement and decrease in the NYHA classification among patients in both groups, but no significant difference between groups. Levosimendan did not reduce BNP levels in patients with AF patients, which might be considered as an indicator of a limited efficacy of levosimendan on decompensated, acute HF patients with AF, compared to patients with SR.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
A 2009 study conducted an observational in Decompensated heart failure (n=62). Atrial fibrillation vs. Sinus rhythm was evaluated on Post-treatment BNP levels (pg/ml) (p=0.2 vs baseline (AF); 0.002 vs baseline (SR)). Levosimendan significantly decreased BNP levels in heart failure patients with sinus rhythm (p=0.002) but did not reduce BNP levels in patients with chronic atrial fibrillation (p=0.2).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: