4.5 Article

Levosimendan improves renal function in patients with acute decompensated heart failure: Comparison with dobutamine

期刊

CARDIOVASCULAR DRUGS AND THERAPY
卷 21, 期 6, 页码 431-435

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10557-007-6066-7

关键词

levosimendan; dobutamine; heart failure; renal function; glomerular filtration rate

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background Levosimendan is a relatively new cardiac inotropic agent with calcium sensitizing activity. This study was conducted to investigate the effects of levosimendan (L) and dobutamine (D) on renal function in patients hospitalized with decompensated heart failure (HF). Method The present study included 88 consecutive patients hospitalized with acutely decompensated HF (New York Heart Association (NYHA) Class 3-4) requiring inotropic therapy. Patients were randomized 2:1 to either L or D for intravenous inotropic support. Diuretic therapy was kept constant during infusions. Renal function values, including serum creatinine (CR), blood urea nitrogen, 24-h urinary output levels and calculated glomerular filtration rate (GFR) were measured just prior to and 24 h after the infusions in all patients, and 48 and 72 h after the infusions in every second patient in both groups. The pre and post-infusion values of renal function and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) were evaluated. Results LVEF increased significantly in both groups. Those in L showed a significant improvement in calculated GFR after 24 h, whereas those in D showed no significant change (median in change in L:+15.3%, median change in D: -1.33%). Furthermore, in the L group a significant improvement was observed in calculated GFR after 72 h compared to baseline levels, whereas in D no significant change (median change in L:+45.45%, median change in D: +0.09%) was seen. Both agents improved 24-h urinary output. Conclusion Levosimendan seems to provide beneficial effects in terms of improvement in renal function compared to dobutamine in patients with heart failure who require inotropic therapy.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据