Evidence Hub

Efficacy and Safety of Pulmonary Vasodilator and Inodilator Drugs in Congenital Heart Disease Surgery: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Ollosu M, Tripodi VF, Aresu C, Ledda G, Manai F, Marini C, Musu M, Ippolito M et al.

Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia, 2026

3,118 participants

Abstract

Background: Perioperative management of congenital heart disease (CHD) surgery presents a unique challenge due to significant pathophysiological alterations, with pulmonary hypertension contributing substantially to morbidity and mortality. Although pulmonary vasodilators and inodilators are commonly used, evidence of their efficacy and safety remains limited.

Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness and safety of vasodilators and inodilators in pediatric patients undergoing CHD surgery.

Design: Systematic review with network meta-analysis.

Data sources: PubMed, CENTRAL, and Embase.

Eligibility criteria: We included single- or double-blind, parallel-group, randomized controlled trials comparing the perioperative use of vasodilators and inodilators in pediatric CHD surgery. We selected only English-language studies. We excluded crossover, non randomized trials and trials comparing the same drugs in all study arms.

Results: We included 28 randomized controlled trials involving 3118 patients. Intravenous levosimendan ranked highest in decreasing postoperative mortality, although the effect was not statistically significant. Intravenous sildenafil and inhaled nitric oxide (NO) significantly reduced the duration of mechanical ventilation, and inhaled NO also significantly shortened the length of intensive care unit stay. Inhaled iloprost, NO, and enteral sildenafil reduced mean pulmonary artery pressure. No intervention significantly affected the incidence of acute kidney…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid. Reported size: 3,118 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free