ArticleClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2026
Low-dose levosimendan infusions in advanced heart failure: efficacy, safety, and factors associated with outcomes.
Article in Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundIn advanced heart failure (AdHF), repeated levosimendan infusions between 0.1 and 0.2 μg/kg/min for 6-24 h every 2-4 weeks were associated with inconsistent outcomes and trends towards worse prognosis. Treatment effect with lower dosing is however unknown. The aims of this retrospective study were to assess the impact of 24-h levosimendan cycles at 0.05 μg/kg/min every 4 weeks on HF therapy, outcomes, and safety and to identify predictors of treatment efficacy.
methodsAmong 286 AdHF patients, 39 levosimendan-treated subjects (4.19 ± 2.6 infusions) and 39 standard-of-care (SOC) subjects matched 1:1 based on a propensity score accounting for age, sex, ischemic heart disease, left ventricular (LV) ejection fraction, creatinine, heart rhythm, and heart transplantation (HTx) listing underwent comparison of their outcome. Efficacy was defined as 1-year survival without LV-assist-device, urgent HTx and urgent hospitalization for HF. Adverse events (AE) included permanent levosimendan interruption, sustained arrhythmias, or hypotension occasioning permanent infusion hold.
resultsBeta-blocker (BB) dose increased with levosimendan [34.7% (18.4-50%) of target-dose at 6-months vs. 21.9% (6.25-25%) at baseline (P = 0.022)]. At 1 year, 26 patients reached the efficacy endpoint in the levosimendan group vs. 14 in the SOC group (HR = 0.42; 95% CI = 0.22-0.83; P = 0.01). The benefit of levosimendan was essentially driven by the reduction of HF hospitalization (HR = 0.367; 95% CI = 0.16-0.85; P = 0.014), with no difference in the reduction of death, LVAD or SU-HTx (HR = 0.8; 95% CI = 0.3-21.4; P = 0.65). No AE occurred. We found no prognostic factor at baseline but BB therapy (95.6% vs. 50%; P = 0.005), higher BB dosing (33 ± 20% vs. 9 ± 20% of target-dose; P = 0.036), and lower heart rate (71 ± 10.4 vs. 81 ± 14 bpm; P = 0.039) at 3 months were associated with treatment efficacy.
conclusionOur findings raise the hypotheses that low-dose levosimendan is safe, enables BB up-titration, and is associated with improved outcomes. Heart rate, BB therapy, and BB dosing at 3 months may predict event-free survival.
Indexed as
Identifiers
42234131What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.