Acute left ventricular dysfunction is a major complication of cardiac surgery and is associated with increased mortality. Meta-analyses of small trials suggest that levosimendan may result in a higher rate of survival among patients undergoing cardiac surgery. We conducted a multicenter, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving patients in whom perioperative hemodynamic support was indicated after cardiac surgery, according to prespecified criteria. Patients were randomly assigned to receive levosimendan (in a continuous infusion at a dose of 0.025 to 0.2 μg per kilogram of body weight per minute) or placebo, for up to 48 hours or until discharge from the intensive care unit (ICU), in addition to standard care. The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. The trial was stopped for futility after 506 patients were enrolled. A total of 248 patients were assigned to receive levosimendan and 258 to receive placebo. There was no significant difference in 30-day mortality between the levosimendan group and the placebo group (32 patients [12.9%] and 33 patients [12.8%], respectively; absolute risk difference, 0.1 percentage points; 95% confidence interval [CI], −5.7 to 5.9; P=0.97). There were no significant differences between the levosimendan group and the placebo group in the durations of mechanical ventilation (median, 19 hours and 21 hours, respectively; median difference, −2 hours; 95% CI, −5 to 1; P=0.48), ICU stay (median, 72 hours and 84 hours, respectively; median difference, −12 hours; 95% CI, −21 to 2; P=0.09), and hospital stay (median, 14 days and 14 days, respectively; median difference, 0 days; 95% CI, −1 to 2; P=0.39). There was no significant difference between the levosimendan group and the placebo group in rates of hypotension or cardiac arrhythmias. In patients who required perioperative hemodynamic support after cardiac surgery, low-dose levosimendan in addition to standard care did not result in lower 30-day mortality than placebo. (Funded by the Italian Ministry of Health; CHEETAH ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00994825.)

Volatile (inhaled) anesthetic agents have cardioprotective effects, which might improve clinical outcomes in patients undergoing coronary-artery bypass grafting (CABG). We conducted a pragmatic, multicenter, single-blind, controlled trial at 36 centers in 13 countries. Patients scheduled to undergo elective CABG were randomly assigned to an intraoperative anesthetic regimen that included a volatile anesthetic (desflurane, isoflurane, or sevoflurane) or to total intravenous anesthesia. The primary outcome was death from any cause at 1 year. A total of 5400 patients were randomly assigned: 2709 to the volatile anesthetics group and 2691 to the total intravenous anesthesia group. On-pump CABG was performed in 64% of patients, with a mean duration of cardiopulmonary bypass of 79 minutes. The two groups were similar with respect to demographic and clinical characteristics at baseline, the duration of cardiopulmonary bypass, and the number of grafts. At the time of the second interim analysis, the data and safety monitoring board advised that the trial should be stopped for futility. No significant difference between the groups with respect to deaths from any cause was seen at 1 year (2.8% in the volatile anesthetics group and 3.0% in the total intravenous anesthesia group; relative risk, 0.94; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.69 to 1.29; P=0.71), with data available for 5353 patients (99.1%), or at 30 days (1.4% and 1.3%, respectively; relative risk, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.70 to 1.76), with data available for 5398 patients (99.9%). There were no significant differences between the groups in any of the secondary outcomes or in the incidence of prespecified adverse events, including myocardial infarction. Among patients undergoing elective CABG, anesthesia with a volatile agent did not result in significantly fewer deaths at 1 year than total intravenous anesthesia. (Funded by the Italian Ministry of Health; MYRIAD ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02105610.)

Phosphocreatine (PCr) plays an important role in the energy metabolism of the heart and a decrease in its intracellular concentration results in alteration of myocardium energetics and work. We conducted a meta-analysis of all randomized and matched trials that compared PCr with placebo or standard treatment in patients with coronary artery disease or chronic heart failure or in those undergoing cardiac surgery. We systematically searched PubMed/Medline, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and Google Scholar up to 1 November 2015, for pertinent trials. The primary outcome was all-cause mortality. Secondary outcomes included inotrope use, ejection fraction (EF), peak creatinine kinase-myocardial band (CK-MB) release and the incidence of major arrhythmias, as well as spontaneous recovery of the heart performance in the subgroup of patients undergoing cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass. We pooled odds ratio (OR) and mean difference (MD) using fixed- and random effects models. We identified 41 controlled trials, of them 32 were randomized. Patients receiving PCr had lower all-cause mortality when compared with the control group [61/1731 (3.5%) vs 177/1667 (10.6%); OR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.51–0.99; P = 0.04; I² = 0%; with 3400 patients and 22 trials included]. Phosphocreatine administration was associated with higher LVEF (MD: 3.82, 95% CI: 1.18–6.46; P = 0.005; I² = 98%), lower peak CK-MB release (MD: −6.08, 95% CI: −8.01, −4.15; P < 0.001; I² = 97%), lower rate of major arrhythmias (OR: 0.42; 95% CI: 0.27–0.66; P < 0.001; I² = 0%), lower incidence of inotropic support (OR: 0.39, 95% CI: 0.25–0.61; P < 0.001; I² = 56%) and a higher level of spontaneous recovery of the heart performance after cardiopulmonary bypass (OR: 3.49, 95% CI: 2.28–5.35; P < 0.001; I² = 49%) when compared with the control group. In a mixed population of patients with coronary artery disease, chronic heart failure or in those undergoing cardiac surgery, PCr may reduce all-cause short-term mortality. In addition, PCr administration was associated with improved cardiac outcomes. Owing to the pharmacological plausibility of this effect and to the concordance of the beneficial effects of PCr on several secondary but important outcomes and survival, there is urgent need for a large multicentre randomized trial to confirm these findings.