The molecular background of the Ca(2+)-sensitizing effect of levosimendan relates to its specific interaction with the Ca(2+)-sensor troponin C molecule in the cardiac myofilaments. Over the years, significant preclinical and clinical evidence has accumulated and revealed a variety of beneficial pleiotropic effects of levosimendan and of its long-lived metabolite, OR-1896. First of all, activation of ATP-sensitive sarcolemmal K(+) channels of smooth muscle cells appears as a powerful vasodilator mechanism. Additionally, activation of ATP-sensitive K(+) channels in the mitochondria potentially extends the range of cellular actions towards the modulation of mitochondrial ATP production and implicates a pharmacological mechanism for cardioprotection. Finally, it has become evident, that levosimendan possesses an isoform-selective phosphodiesterase-inhibitory effect. Interpretation of the complex mechanism of levosimendan action requires that all potential pharmacological interactions are analyzed carefully in the framework of the currently available evidence. These data indicate that the cardiovascular effects of levosimendan are exerted via more than an isolated drug-receptor interaction, and involve favorable energetic and neurohormonal changes that are unique in comparison to other types of inodilators.

Fibrosis is a pivotal player in heart failure development and progression. Measurements of (markers of) fibrosis in tissue and blood may help to diagnose and risk stratify patients with heart failure, and its treatment may be effective in preventing heart failure and its progression. A lack of pathophysiological insights and uniform definitions has hampered the research in fibrosis and heart failure. The Translational Research Committee of the Heart Failure Association discussed several aspects of fibrosis in their workshop. Early insidious perturbations such as subclinical hypertension or inflammation may trigger first fibrotic events, while more dramatic triggers such as myocardial infarction and myocarditis give rise to full blown scar formation and ongoing fibrosis in diseased hearts. Aging itself is also associated with a cardiac phenotype that includes fibrosis. Fibrosis is an extremely heterogeneous phenomenon, as several stages of the fibrotic process exist, each with different fibrosis subtypes and a different composition of various cells and proteins — resulting in a very complex pathophysiology. As a result, detection of fibrosis, e.g. using current cardiac imaging modalities or plasma biomarkers, will detect only specific subforms of fibrosis, but cannot capture all aspects of the complex fibrotic process. Furthermore, several anti-fibrotic therapies are under investigation, but such therapies generally target aspecific aspects of the fibrotic process and suffer from a lack of precision. This review discusses the mechanisms and the caveats and proposes a roadmap for future research.

Heart failure (HF) is growing to a modern epidemic and despite advances in therapy, it still carries an ominous prognosis and a significant socioeconomic burden.¹ Many novel agents that emerged as promising HF drugs failed to improve residual morbidity and mortality.^2,3 Since developing and testing new agents has become increasingly costly,⁴ the concept of repurposing existing drugs for new indications has gained considerable importance.

Despite improvements in medical therapy and device-based treatment, heart failure (HF) continues to impose enormous burdens on patients and health care systems worldwide. Alterations in autonomic nervous system (ANS) activity contribute to cardiac disease progression, and the recent development of invasive techniques and electrical stimulation devices has opened new avenues for specific targeting of the sympathetic and parasympathetic branches of the ANS. The Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology recently organized an expert workshop which brought together clinicians, trialists and basic scientists to discuss the ANS as a therapeutic target in HF. The questions addressed were: (i) What are the abnormalities of ANS in HF patients? (ii) What methods are available to measure autonomic dysfunction? (iii) What therapeutic interventions are available to target the ANS in patients with HF, and what are their specific strengths and weaknesses? (iv) What have we learned from previous ANS trials? (v) How should we proceed in the future?