Table 1 Clinical outcomes among RCTs comparing prophylactic levosimendan therapy prior to cardiac surgery in high-risk patients with an ejection fraction of < 35%. In hospital/30 days follow-up. Data from Weber et al. [6]. CI, confidence interval; LH, length of hospital stay; OR, odds ratio, with values < 1 favouring levosimendan; WMD, weighted mean difference, with negative values favouring levosimendan
Dichotomous | Sample size (n) | Prevalence % (n) | Levosimendan % (n) | Control % (n) | OR (95% CnI) | X2-test p-value |
Mortality | 1,224 | 5.5% (67) | 3.7% (23) | 7.2% (44) | 0.49 (0.29-0.83) | 0.0098 |
Myocardial infarction | 1,141 | 12.4% (141) | 12.0% (69) | 12.7% (72) | 0.60 (0.15-2.41) | 0.7795 |
Low cardiac output | 1,191 | 19.8% (236) | 15.3% (92) | 24.4% (144) | 0.56 (0.42-0.75) | 0.0001 |
Acute kidney injury | 302 | 11.9% (36) | 7.9% (12) | 16.0% (24) | 0.44 (0.21-0.93) | 0.0460 |
Renal replacement | 1,224 | 4.7% (57) | 3.4% (21) | 5.9% (36) | 0.54 (0.31-0.95) | 0.0497 |
Atrial fibrillation | 1,191 | 32.0% (381) | 31.2% (187) | 32.8% (194) | 0.52 (0.19-1.40) | 0.5812 |
Prolonged inotropic support | 849 | 58.8% (499) | 54.9% (235) | 62.7% (264) | 0.72 (0.55-0.95) | 0.0056 |
Continuous | Sample size (n) | WMD | 95% CnI | Overall effect p–value | ||
ICU stay (days) | 72 | -2.21 | -6.18 to 1.75 | 0.27 | ||
LH (days) | 346 | -3.97 | -4.69 to -3.25 | < 0.0001 | ||