Inotropes Are Not Linked to Increased Mortality in Heart Failure

M. Guglin
{"title":"Inotropes Are Not Linked to Increased Mortality in Heart Failure","authors":"M. Guglin","doi":"10.13023/VAD.2015.09","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"How to use inotropes is one of the most controversial topics in the management of heart failure. While most clinicians use these drugs, and recognize the state of inotrope dependency, current guidelines recommend them onlu as a bridge or palliation. Thus, inotropes are considered either neutral or detrimental in terms of outcomes. Meanwhile, properly designed randomized clinical trials testing the outcomes on inotropes, have never been performed and it is unlikely that they will ever be attempted. These trials would require randomizing patients with advanced heart failure, low output syndrome, and impaired end-organ perfusion into groups that received or not received inotropes, or received inotropes or placebo. Many physicians would consider this design unethical so the trials would be challenging to implement. But if it is unethical to deny inotropes to this subset of patients, we have to admit that inotropes do not only improve quality of life, but prolong it, or decrease mortality. Otherwise, we consider it unethical to deny the medication which increases mortality. In this review, we analyze the current evidence relating to inotropes and outcomes. We demonstrate that the original trials were performed with agents that are no longer in use, or on patients without an indication for inotropes, or at a time before automatic cardio-defibrillators were recommended for primary prevention. We conclude that current guidelines for inotropes are misleading in their interpretation of outcomes in patients with advanced heart failure. The guidelines should be revised to adequately reflect the evidence.","PeriodicalId":91822,"journal":{"name":"The VAD journal : the journal of mechanical assisted circulation and heart failure","volume":"136 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-09-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The VAD journal : the journal of mechanical assisted circulation and heart failure","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.13023/VAD.2015.09","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

How to use inotropes is one of the most controversial topics in the management of heart failure. While most clinicians use these drugs, and recognize the state of inotrope dependency, current guidelines recommend them onlu as a bridge or palliation. Thus, inotropes are considered either neutral or detrimental in terms of outcomes. Meanwhile, properly designed randomized clinical trials testing the outcomes on inotropes, have never been performed and it is unlikely that they will ever be attempted. These trials would require randomizing patients with advanced heart failure, low output syndrome, and impaired end-organ perfusion into groups that received or not received inotropes, or received inotropes or placebo. Many physicians would consider this design unethical so the trials would be challenging to implement. But if it is unethical to deny inotropes to this subset of patients, we have to admit that inotropes do not only improve quality of life, but prolong it, or decrease mortality. Otherwise, we consider it unethical to deny the medication which increases mortality. In this review, we analyze the current evidence relating to inotropes and outcomes. We demonstrate that the original trials were performed with agents that are no longer in use, or on patients without an indication for inotropes, or at a time before automatic cardio-defibrillators were recommended for primary prevention. We conclude that current guidelines for inotropes are misleading in their interpretation of outcomes in patients with advanced heart failure. The guidelines should be revised to adequately reflect the evidence.
正性肌力与心力衰竭死亡率增加无关
如何使用肌力药物是心力衰竭治疗中最具争议的话题之一。虽然大多数临床医生使用这些药物,并认识到肌力依赖的状态,但目前的指南建议它们仅作为桥梁或缓解。因此,就结果而言,正性肌力被认为是中性的或有害的。与此同时,设计合理的随机临床试验从未进行过,也不太可能尝试进行。这些试验需要将晚期心力衰竭、低输出综合征和终末器官灌注受损的患者随机分为两组,分别接受或未接受肌力药物治疗,或接受肌力药物治疗或安慰剂治疗。许多医生会认为这种设计是不道德的,所以试验的实施将具有挑战性。但是,如果拒绝对这部分患者使用正性肌力药物是不道德的,我们必须承认,正性肌力药物不仅能改善生活质量,还能延长生活质量,或降低死亡率。否则,我们认为拒绝这种增加死亡率的药物是不道德的。在这篇综述中,我们分析了目前有关肌力和结果的证据。我们证明,最初的试验是在不再使用的药物中进行的,或者是在没有肌力药物适应症的患者中进行的,或者是在自动心脏除颤器被推荐用于一级预防之前进行的。我们的结论是,目前的肌力药物指南在解释晚期心力衰竭患者的结果时具有误导性。指南应进行修订,以充分反映证据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信