Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation improves central sleep apnea, sleep quality, and quality of life regardless of prior positive airway pressure treatment.
Schwartz, Alan R; Goldberg, Lee R; McKane, Scott; Morgenthaler, Timothy I.
Afiliação
  • Schwartz AR; Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA. aschwar02@gmail.com.
  • Goldberg LR; Universidad Peruana Cayetano Heredia, Lima, Peru. aschwar02@gmail.com.
  • McKane S; Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, USA.
  • Morgenthaler TI; Respicardia, Inc., Minnetonka, MN, USA.
Sleep Breath ; 25(4): 2053-2063, 2021 12.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33745107
STUDY OBJECTIVE: Positive airway pressure (PAP) therapy for central sleep apnea (CSA) is often poorly tolerated, ineffective, or contraindicated. Transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation (TPNS) offers an alternative, although its impact on previously PAP-treated patients with CSA has not been examined. METHODS: TPNS responses among PAP-naïve and prior PAP-treated patients from the remede® System Pivotal Trial were assessed. Of 151, 56 (37%) used PAP therapy before enrolling in the trial. Patients were implanted with a TPNS device and randomized to either active or deferred (control) therapy for 6 months before therapy activation. Apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) and patient-reported outcomes (PRO) were assessed at baseline, and 6 and 12 months following active therapy. RESULTS: Patients had moderate-severe CSA at baseline, which was of greater severity and more symptomatic in the PAP-treated vs. PAP-naïve group (median AHI 52/h vs. 38, central apnea index (CAI) 32/h vs. 18, Epworth Sleepiness Scale 13 vs. 10, fatigue severity scale 5.2 vs. 4.5). Twelve months of TPNS decreased AHI to <20/h and CAI to ≤2/h. Both groups showed reductions in daytime sleepiness and fatigue, improved well-being by patient global assessment, and high therapeutic acceptance with 98% and 94% of PAP-treated and PAP-naïve patients indicating they would undergo the implant again. Stimulation produced discomfort in approximately one-third of patients, yet <5% of prior PAP-treated participants discontinued therapy. CONCLUSION: Polysomnographic and clinical responses to TPNS were comparable in PAP-naïve and prior PAP-treated CSA patients. TPNS is a viable therapy across a broad spectrum of CSA patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier NCT01816776; March 22, 2013.
Assuntos
Palavras-chave

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Nervo Frênico / Terapia por Estimulação Elétrica / Apneia do Sono Tipo Central / Neuroestimuladores Implantáveis Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Prognostic_studies Limite: Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: Sleep Breath Assunto da revista: NEUROLOGIA / OTORRINOLARINGOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Assunto principal: Nervo Frênico / Terapia por Estimulação Elétrica / Apneia do Sono Tipo Central / Neuroestimuladores Implantáveis Tipo de estudo: Clinical_trials / Prognostic_studies Limite: Aged / Female / Humans / Male / Middle aged Idioma: En Revista: Sleep Breath Assunto da revista: NEUROLOGIA / OTORRINOLARINGOLOGIA Ano de publicação: 2021 Tipo de documento: Article País de afiliação: Estados Unidos