Long-Term Experience with First-Generation Implantable Neurostimulation Device in Central Sleep Apnea Treatment.

BACKGROUND: Sleep-disordered breathing (SDB) and Cheyne-Stokes respiration (CSR) are associated with shorter survival in patients with heart failure. A novel treatment method for this patient group is unilateral phrenic nerve stimulation by the remede® system (Respicardia Inc., Minnetonka, MN, USA), a transvenously implantable neurostimulation device, which has recently been studied in a large randomized, controlled trial. Previous literature has shown efficacy and safety of the treatment with this first-generation device, but hardly any data are available on long-term clinical parameters, the remede® device's battery lifetime, device exchangeability, lead position stability, surgical accessibility, and manageability. METHODS: We performed remede® device replacements in consecutive patients for battery depletion, and documented clinical parameters, longevity, operation procedure, complications, and difficulties. RESULTS: All patients were on neurostimulation treatment by phrenic nerve neurostimulation when device replacement became necessary. Apnea-hypopnea index (from 45 ± 4/h to 9 ± 4/h), oxygen-desaturation index (from 35 ± 7/h to 7 ± 6/h), and time spent with oxygen saturation of <90% (T < 90% from 5 ± 7% to 0 ± 0%) were improved and improvements remained constant throughout the 4-year follow-up. Mean battery life was 4.2 ± 0.2 years and mean replacement procedure time was 25 ± 5.1 minutes. Apart from conventional X-ray documentation of stable lead positions in a long-term setting, no radiation or contrast dye usage was needed and no major complications occurred. In addition, clinical exercise capacity and sleepiness symptoms improved. CONCLUSIONS: Novel remede® device shows sustained therapy efficacy and safety in terms of stable lead positions over 4 years. Long-term phrenic nerve neurostimulation therapy for central SDB/CSR appears feasible in a clinical routine setting.

Transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation for the treatment of central sleep apnoea in heart failure.

AIMS: Periodic breathing with central sleep apnoea (CSA) is common in heart failure patients and is associated with poor quality of life and increased risk of morbidity and mortality. We conducted a prospective, non-randomized, acute study to determine the feasibility of using unilateral transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation for the treatment of CSA in heart failure patients. METHODS AND RESULTS: Thirty-one patients from six centres underwent attempted transvenous lead placement. Of these, 16 qualified to undergo two successive nights of polysomnography-one night with and one night without phrenic nerve stimulation. Comparisons were made between the two nights using the following indices: apnoea-hypopnoea index (AHI), central apnoea index (CAI), obstructive apnoea index (OAI), hypopnoea index, arousal index, and 4% oxygen desaturation index (ODI4%). Patients underwent phrenic nerve stimulation from either the right brachiocephalic vein (n = 8) or the left brachiocephalic or pericardiophrenic vein (n = 8). Therapy period was (mean ± SD) 251 ± 71 min. Stimulation resulted in significant improvement in the AHI [median (inter-quartile range); 45 (39-59) vs. 23 (12-27) events/h, P = 0.002], CAI [27 (11-38) vs. 1 (0-5) events/h, P≤ 0.001], arousal index [32 (20-42) vs. 12 (9-27) events/h, P = 0.001], and ODI4% [31 (22-36) vs. 14 (7-20) events/h, P = 0.002]. No significant changes occurred in the OAI or hypopnoea index. Two adverse events occurred (lead thrombus and episode of ventricular tachycardia), though neither was directly related to phrenic nerve stimulation therapy. CONCLUSION: Unilateral transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation significantly reduces episodes of CSA and restores a more natural breathing pattern in patients with heart failure. This approach may represent a novel therapy for CSA and warrants further study.