Design of the remedē System Pivotal Trial: A Prospective, Randomized Study in the Use of Respiratory Rhythm Management to Treat Central Sleep Apnea

Win ratio analysis of transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation to treat central sleep apnoea in heart failure

AIMS

Central sleep apnoea (CSA) is present in 20-40% of heart failure (HF) patients and is associated with poor clinical outcomes and health status. Transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation (TPNS) is an available treatment for CSA in HF patients. The impact on HF outcomes is incompletely understood. The win ratio (WR) allows inclusion of multiple endpoint components, considers the relative severity of each component, and permits assessment of recurrent events in evaluation of clinical benefit.

METHODS AND RESULTS

A WR hierarchy was pre-defined for analysis of the HF subgroup of the remedē® System Pivotal Trial. The analysis used three hierarchical components to compare all treated to all control subjects: longest survival, lowest HF hospitalization rate, and ≥2-category difference in Patient Global Assessment at 6 months. Sensitivity analyses were performed substituting Epworth Sleepiness Scale and 4% oxygen desaturation index for the third component, and a 4-component WR hierarchy was also evaluated. Ninety-one HF subjects, 43 receiving TPNS and 48 in the control group, provided 2064 pairwise comparisons. More patients treated with TPNS experienced clinical benefit compared with control (WR 4.92, 95% confidence interval 2.27-10.63, P < 0.0001). There were 1111 (53.83%) winning pairwise comparisons for the treatment group and 226 (10.95%) for the control group. Similarly, large WRs were observed for all additional WR hierarchies.

CONCLUSIONS

This WR analysis of the remedē® System Pivotal Trial suggests that TPNS may be superior to untreated CSA in HF patients with CSA using a hierarchical clinical benefit endpoint composed of mortality, HF hospitalization, and health status.

Analysis by sex of safety and effectiveness of transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation

PURPOSE

Little is known about sex differences in the treatment of central sleep apnea (CSA). Our post hoc analysis of the remedē System Pivotal Trial aimed to determine sex-specific differences in the safety and effectiveness of treating moderate to severe CSA in adults with transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation (TPNS).

METHODS

Men and women enrolled in the remedē System Pivotal Trial were included in this post hoc analysis of the effect of TPNS on polysomnographic measures, Epworth Sleepiness Scale, and patient global assessment for quality of life.

RESULTS

Women (n = 16) experienced improvement in CSA metrics that were comparable to the benefits experienced by men (n = 135), with central apneas being practically eliminated post TPNS. Women experienced improvement in sleep quality and architecture that was comparable to men post TPNS. While women had lower baseline apnea hypopnea index than men, their quality of life was worse at baseline. Additionally, women reported a 25-percentage point greater improvement in quality of life compared to men after 12 months of TPNS therapy. TPNS was found to be safe in women, with no related serious adverse events through 12 months post-implant, while men had a low rate of 10%.

CONCLUSION

Although women had less prevalent and less severe CSA than men, they were more likely to report reduced quality of life. Transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation may be a safe and effective tool in the treatment of moderate to severe CSA in women. Larger studies of women with CSA are needed to confirm our findings.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01816776; March 22, 2013.

Transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation to treat central sleep apnoea in patients with heart failure may improve sleep, quality of life, and symptoms

BACKGROUND AND AIM

Sleep disorder breathing is an important non-cardiovascular comorbidity in patients with heart failure (HF). However, central sleep apnoea (CSA) remains poorly diagnosed and treated. This post-hoc analysis examined symptoms and quality of life in patients with CSA and HF following 12 months of transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation (TPNS) therapy.

METHODS AND RESULT

: Patients enrolled in remedē System Pivotal trial were invited to complete self-reported questionnaires. Symptoms and responses to three validated questionnaires were examined. Percentage of patients noting an impairment was calculated at baseline. At 12 months, % of patients experiencing improvement, no change, or worsening was calculated. Shifts from symptom presence at baseline to absence at 12 months was assessed for those symptoms experienced by ≥50% of patients at baseline. Seventy-five patients were included. Most frequently reported symptoms were fatigue and daytime sleepiness. Following 12 months of TPNS, a variety of subjective improvements were observed; 45% of patients indicating cessation of daytime sleepiness, 44% cessation of fatigue/weakness, and 52% no longer having difficulty falling/staying asleep. Specific questions related to tiredness/fatigue, motivation, and chance of dozing provided an insight into potential areas of improvement. Furthermore, at least 60% of patients reported resolution of insomnia/fragmented sleep and snoring on therapy.

CONCLUSION

Adult patients with CSA and HF experience distressing symptoms and limitations. TPNS was found to improve many of these. Awareness of key symptoms or limitations patients experience can be used to inform the development of a CSA-specific patient questionnaire to identify CSA sooner and aid treatment decisions.

Evaluation and Treatment of Central Sleep Apnea in Patients with Heart Failure

Sleep-disordered breathing (SDB) is a common comorbidity in patients with heart failure (HF). Prevalence of the most common subtypes of SDB, central sleep apnea (CSA) and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), is increasing, which is concerning due to the association of SDB with increased mortality in patients with heart failure. Despite an increasing burden of CSA in HF, it is difficult to detect using current diagnostic tools and the treatment modalities are limited by variable efficacy and patient adherence. Though positive airway pressure therapies remain the cornerstone of OSA treatment, the management of CSA in the setting of HF continues to evolve. The association of the presence of CSA with worse prognosis in HF patients warrants the need for routine screening for signs and symptoms of CSA in this population. In this review, we examine the connection between CSA and HF, highlighting advancements in timely diagnostics, treatment modalities, and strategies to promote facilitation of compliance in this high-risk cohort.

Abnormal Sleep-Related Breathing Related to Heart Failure

Sleep-disordered breathing (SDB) is highly prevalent in patients with heart failure (HF). Untreated obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and central sleep apnea (CSA) in patients with HF are associated with worse outcomes. Detailed sleep history along with polysomnography (PSG) should be conducted if SDB is suspected in patients with HF. First line of treatment is the optimization of medical therapy for HF and if symptoms persist despite optimization of the treatment, positive airway pressure (PAP) therapy will be started to treat SDB. At present, there is limited evidence to prescribe any drugs for treating CSA in patients with HF. There is limited evidence for the efficacy of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) or adaptive servo-ventilation (ASV) in improving mortality in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). There is a need to perform well-designed studies to identify different phenotypes of CSA/OSA in patients with HF and to determine which phenotype responds to which therapy. Results of ongoing trials, ADVENT-HF, and LOFT-HF are eagerly awaited to shed more light on the management of CSA in patients with HF. Until then the management of SDB in patients with HF is limited due to the lack of evidence and guidance for treating SDB in patients with HF.

Device Therapy in Chronic Heart Failure: JACC State-of-the-Art Review

The regulatory landscape for device-based heart failure (HF) therapies has seen a major shift in the last 7 years. In 2013, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration released guidance for early feasibility and first-in-human studies, thereby encouraging device innovation, and in 2016 the U.S. Congress authorized the Breakthrough Devices Program to expedite access for Americans to innovative devices indicated for diagnosis and treatment of serious illnesses, such as HF. Since December 2016, there has been an increase in the number of HF devices for which manufacturers are seeking approval through the breakthrough designation pathway. This has led to a rapid uptake in the development and evaluation of device-based HF therapies. This article reviews the current and future landscape of device therapies for chronic HF and associated comorbidities and the regulatory environment that is driving current and future innovation.

Transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation to treat idiopathic central sleep apnea

STUDY OBJECTIVES

Idiopathic central sleep apnea (ICSA) is a rare disorder diagnosed when known causes of central sleep apnea are excluded. No established treatments exist for ICSA, and long-term studies are lacking. We assessed the long-term effectiveness and safety of transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation in patients with ICSA.

METHODS

In the remedē System Pivotal Trial, 16/151 (11%) participants with central sleep apnea were diagnosed as having ICSA. Patients were implanted and followed through 18 months of active therapy. Polysomnograms obtained at baseline and at 6, 12, and 18 months were scored by a central laboratory. Sleep metrics and patient-reported quality of life outcomes were assessed.

RESULTS

Patients experienced moderate-severe central sleep apnea. The baseline AHI, central apnea index, and arousal index were 40, 25, and 32 events/h of sleep, respectively. These metrics improved at 6, 12, and 18 months of therapy: the AHI decreased by 25, 25, and 23 events/h (P < .001 at each visit), the central apnea index by 22, 23, and 22 events/h (P < .001 at each visit), and the arousal index by 12 (P = .005), 11 (P = .035), and 13 events/h (P < .001). Quality of life instruments showed clinically meaningful improvements in daytime somnolence, fatigue, general and mental health, and social functioning. The only related serious adverse event was lead component failure in 1 patient.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the longest prospective study for the treatment of ICSA. Transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation significantly decreased sleep-disordered breathing metrics with consequent improvement in quality of life at 6 months, and all benefits were sustained through 18 months.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

Registry: ClinicalTrials.gov; Name: Respicardia, Inc. Pivotal Trial of the remedē System; URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01816776; Identifier: NCT01816776.

Extra-cardiac targets in the management of cardiometabolic disease: Device-based therapies

Heart failure (HF) does not occur in a vacuum and is commonly defined and exacerbated by its co‐morbid conditions. Neurohormonal imbalance and systemic inflammation are some of the key pathomechanisms of HF but also commonly encountered co‐morbidities such as arterial hypertension, diabetes mellitus, cachexia, obesity and sleep‐disordered breathing. A cornerstone of HF management is neurohormonal blockade, which in HF with reduced ejection fraction has been tied to a reduction in morbidity and mortality. Pharmacological treatment effective in patients with HF with reduced ejection fraction did not show substantial effects in HF with preserved ejection fraction. Here, we review novel device‐based therapies using neuromodulation of extra‐cardiac targets to treat cardiometabolic disease.

Transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation improves central sleep apnea, sleep quality, and quality of life regardless of prior positive airway pressure treatment

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 remedē^® 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.

Transvenous Phrenic Nerve Stimulation for Treatment of Central Sleep Apnea: Five-Year Safety and Efficacy Outcomes

BACKGROUND

The remedē System Pivotal Trial was a prospective, multi-center, randomized trial demonstrating transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation (TPNS) therapy is safe and effectively treats central sleep apnea (CSA) and improves sleep architecture and daytime sleepiness. Subsequently, the remedē System was approved by FDA in 2017. As a condition of approval, the Post Approval Study (PAS) collected clinical evidence regarding long-term safety and effectiveness in adults with moderate to severe CSA through five years post implant.

METHODS

Patients remaining in the Pivotal Trial at the time of FDA approval were invited to enroll in the PAS and consented to undergo sleep studies (scored by a central laboratory), complete the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) questionnaire to assess daytime sleepiness, and safety assessment. All subjects (treatment and former control group) receiving active therapy were pooled; data from both trials were combined for analysis.

RESULTS

Fifty-three of the original 151 Pivotal Trial patients consented to participate in the PAS and 52 completed the 5-year visit. Following TPNS therapy, the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI), central-apnea index (CAI), arousal index, oxygen desaturation index, and sleep architecture showed sustained improvements. Comparing 5 years to baseline, AHI and CAI decreased significantly (AHI baseline median 46 events/hour vs 17 at 5 years; CAI baseline median 23 events/hour vs 1 at 5 years), though residual hypopneas were present. In parallel, the arousal index, oxygen desaturation index and sleep architecture improved. The ESS improved by a statistically significant median reduction of 3 points at 5 years. Serious adverse events related to implant procedure, device or delivered therapy were reported by 14% of patients which include 16 (9%) patients who underwent a pulse generator reposition or lead revision (primarily in the first year). None of the events caused long-term harm. No unanticipated adverse device effects or related deaths occurred through 5 years.

CONCLUSION

Long-term TPNS safely improves CSA, sleep architecture and daytime sleepiness through 5 years post implant.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01816776.

Central Sleep Apnea in Patients with Heart Failure-How to Screen, How to Treat

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Central sleep apnea occurs in up to 50% of heart failure patients and worsens outcomes. Established therapies are limited by minimal supporting evidence, poor patient adherence, and potentially adverse cardiovascular effects. However, transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation, by contracting the diaphragm, restores normal breathing throughout sleep and has been shown to be safe and effective. This review discusses the mechanisms, screening, diagnosis, and therapeutic approaches to CSA in patients with HF.

RECENT FINDINGS

In a prospective, multicenter randomized Pivotal Trial (NCT01816776) of transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation with the remedē System, significantly more treated patients had a ≥ 50% reduction in apnea-hypopnea index compared with controls, with a 41 percentage point difference between group difference at 6 months (p < 0.0001). All hierarchically tested sleep, quality of life, and daytime sleepiness endpoints were significantly improved in treated patients. Freedom from serious related adverse events at 12 months was 91%. Benefits are sustained to 36 months. Transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation improves quality of life in patients with heart failure and central sleep apnea. Controlled trials evaluating the impact of this therapy on mortality/heart failure hospitalizations and "real world" experience are needed to confirm safety and effectiveness.

Improving Nocturnal Hypoxemic Burden with Transvenous Phrenic Nerve Stimulation for the Treatment of Central Sleep Apnea

Nocturnal hypoxemic burden is established as a robust prognostic metric of sleep-disordered breathing (SDB) to predict mortality and treating hypoxemic burden may improve prognosis. The aim of this study was to evaluate improvements in nocturnal hypoxemic burden using transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation (TPNS) to treat patients with central sleep apnea (CSA). The remedē System Pivotal Trial population was examined for nocturnal hypoxemic burden. The minutes of sleep with oxygen saturation < 90% significantly improved in Treatment compared with control (p < .001), with the median improving from 33 min at baseline to 14 min at 6 months. Statistically significant improvements were also observed for average oxygen saturation and lowest oxygen saturation. Hypoxemic burden has been demonstrated to be more predictive for mortality than apnea–hypopnea index (AHI) and should be considered a key metric for therapies used to treat CSA. Transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation is capable of delivering meaningful improvements in nocturnal hypoxemic burden. There is increasing interest in endpoints other than apnea–hypopnea index in sleep-disordered breathing. Nocturnal hypoxemia burden may be more predictive for mortality than apnea–hypopnea index in patients with poor cardiac function. Transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation is capable of improving nocturnal hypoxemic burden.

Transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation for central sleep apnea is safe and effective in patients with concomitant cardiac devices

BACKGROUND

Central sleep apnea is common in heart failure patients. Transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation (TPNS) requires placing a lead to stimulate the phrenic nerve and activate the diaphragm. Data are lacking concerning the safety and efficacy of TPNS in patients with concomitant cardiovascular implantable electronic devices (CIEDs).

OBJECTIVE

To report the safety and efficacy of TPNS in patients with concomitant CIEDs.

METHODS

In the remedē System Pivotal Trial, 151 patients underwent TPNS device implant. This analysis compared patients with concomitant CIEDs to those without with respect to safety, implant metrics, and efficacy of TPNS. Safety was assessed using incidence of adverse events and device-device interactions. A detailed interaction protocol was followed. Implant metrics included overall TPNS implantation success. Efficacy endpoints included changes in the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) and quality of life.

RESULTS

Of 151 patients, 64 (42%) had a concomitant CIED. There were no significant differences between the groups with respect to safety. There were 4 CIED oversensing events in 3 patients leading to 1 inappropriate defibrillator shock and delivery of antitachycardia pacing. There was no difference in efficacy between the CIED and non-CIED subgroups receiving TPNS, with both having similar percentages of patients who achieved ≥50% reduction in AHI and quality-of-life improvement.

CONCLUSION

Concomitant CIED and TPNS therapy is safe. The presence of a concomitant CIED did not seem to impact implant metrics, implantation success, and TPNS efficacy. A detailed interaction protocol should be followed to minimize the incidence of device-device interaction.

Phrenic Nerve Stimulation for the Treatment of Central Sleep Apnea: A Pooled Cohort Analysis

STUDY OBJECTIVES

Early evidence with transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation (PNS) demonstrates improved disease severity and quality of life (QOL) in patients with central sleep apnea (CSA). The goal of this analysis is to evaluate the complete prospective experience with PNS in order to better characterize its efficacy and safety, including in patients with concomitant heart failure (HF).

METHODS

Using pooled individual data from the pilot (n = 57) and pivotal (n = 151) studies of the remedē System in patients with predominant moderate to severe CSA, we evaluated 12-month safety and 6- and 12-month effectiveness based on polysomnography data, QOL, and cardiac function.

RESULTS

Among 208 combined patients (June 2010 to May 2015), a remedē device implant was successful in 197 patients (95%), 50/57 pilot study patients (88%) and 147/151 pivotal trial patients (97%). The pooled cohort included patients with CSA of various etiologies, and 141 (68%) had concomitant HF. PNS reduced apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) at 6 months by a median of -22.6 episodes/h (25th and 75th percentile; -38.6 and -8.4, respectively) (median 58% reduction from baseline, P < .001). Improvement in sleep variables was maintained through 12 months of follow-up. In patients with HF and ejection fraction ≤ 45%, PNS was associated with improvement in systolic function from 27.0% (23.3, 36.0) to 31.1% (24.0, 41.5) at 12 months (P = .003). In the entire cohort, improvement in QOL was concordant with amelioration of sleep measures.

CONCLUSIONS

Transvenous PNS significantly improves CSA severity, sleep quality, ventricular function, and QOL regardless of HF status. Improvements, which are independent of patient compliance, are sustained at 1 year and are associated with acceptable safety.

[Transvenous neurostimulation in central sleep apnea associated with heart failure]

Sleep-related breathing disorders can be classified as either obstructive (OSA) or central sleep apnea (CSA). Whereas there is substantial knowledge about the pathophysiology and sound recommendations for the diagnosis and treatment of OSA, the origin of CSA is still incompletely understood, patient identification is difficult and the necessity for specific treatment is under debate. CSA often accompanies heart failure and is associated with an adverse prognosis. Optimized heart failure treatment reduces CSA and is thus the cornerstone of CSA treatment. In contrast to OSA, noninvasive ventilation does not lead to prognostic improvement in CSA and ASV ventilation may even lead to an increase in mortality. Transvenous neurostimuation of the phrenic nerve is currently under clinical investigation as a new therapeutic modality for CSA. Early results demonstrate positive effects on sleep parameters and quality of life without any evidence for a negative impact on mortality. However, these results await confirmation in larger studies before this new approach can be advocated for routine clinical use.

Phrenic nerve stimulation to treat patients with central sleep apnoea and heart failure

AIMS

The presence of central sleep apnoea (CSA) is associated with poor prognosis in patients with heart failure (HF). The aim of this analysis was to evaluate if using phrenic nerve stimulation to treat CSA in patients with CSA and HF was associated with changes in HF-specific metrics.

METHODS AND RESULTS

All patients randomized in the remedē System Pivotal Trial and identified at baseline with HF were included (n = 96). Effectiveness data from treatment and former control groups were pooled based on months since therapy activation. Changes from baseline to 6 and 12 months in sleep metrics, Epworth Sleepiness Scale, patient global assessment health-related quality of life, Minnesota Living with Heart Failure Questionnaire (MLHFQ), and echocardiographic parameters are reported. HF hospitalization, cardiovascular death, and the composite of HF hospitalization or cardiovascular death within 6 months are reported by the original randomized group assignment for safety assessment. Sleep metrics and quality of life improved from baseline to 6 and 12 months. At 12 months, MLHFQ scores changed by -6.8 ± 20.0 (P = 0.005). The 6-month rate of HF hospitalization was 4.7% in treatment patients (standard error = 3.3) and 17.0% in control patients (standard error = 5.5) (P = 0.065). Reported adverse events were as expected for a transvenous implantable system.

CONCLUSIONS

Phrenic nerve stimulation reduces CSA severity in patients with HF. In parallel, this CSA treatment was associated with benefits on HF quality of life.

Novel Therapies for Sleep Apnea-The Implants Have Arrived!

Positive airway pressure (PAP) therapy has been the standard treatment of choice for sleep disordered breathing, with 29-83% of patients being noncompliant. With the advent of newly Food and Drug Adminisatration (FDA)-approved implantable stimulators for treating sleep disordered breathing in a fraction of noncompliant PAP therapy patients, the landscape of sleep medicine and sleep technology is changing to narrow the gap between compliant and non-compliant patients. The remedē® System for treating central sleep apnea and the Inspire® upper airway stimulation (UAS) therapy for treating obstructive sleep apnea are providing new tools for sleep physicians, elevating sleep technologists' expertise, and paving the way for personalized medicine.

Identification and Treatment of Central Sleep Apnoea: Beyond SERVE-HF

Central sleep apnoea (CSA) occurs in a large proportion of HF patients. CSA has clear detrimental effects, resulting in intermittent hypoxia and sympathetic activation, and is associated with significant morbidity and mortality. Treatment options are limited following the results of a recent trial in which adaptive servo-ventilation resulted in an increase in cardiovascular mortality. Ongoing studies utilising other forms of positive airway pressure may provide additional insight into the results of this trial. A new neurostimulation therapy, phrenic nerve stimulation, has offered a new physiological approach to the treatment of CSA. This therapy has resulted in improvements in the severity of disease and quality of life.

Sustained 12 Month Benefit of Phrenic Nerve Stimulation for Central Sleep Apnea

Transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation improved sleep metrics and quality of life after 6 months versus control in the remedē System Pivotal Trial. This analysis explored the effectiveness of phrenic nerve stimulation in patients with central sleep apnea after 12 months of therapy. Reproducibility of treatment effect was assessed in the former control group in whom the implanted device was initially inactive for the sixth month and subsequently activated when the randomized control assessments were complete. Patients with moderate-to-severe central sleep apnea implanted with the remedē System were randomized to therapy activation at 1 month (treatment) or after 6 months (control). Sleep indices were assessed from baseline to 12 months in the treatment group and from 6 to 12 months in former controls. In the treatment group, a ≥50% reduction in apnea-hypopnea index occurred in 60% of patients at 6 months (95% confidence interval [CI] 47% to 64%) and 67% (95% CI 53% to 78%) at 12 months. After 6 months of therapy, 55% of former controls (95% CI 43% to 67%) achieved ≥50%reduction in apnea-hypopnea index. Patient Global Assessment was markedly ormoderately improved at 6 and 12 months in 60% of treatment patients.Improvements persisted at 12 months. A serious adverse event within 12 months occurred in 13 patients (9%). Phrenic nerve stimulation produced sustained improvements in sleep indices and quality of life to at least 12 months in patients with central sleep apnea. The similar improvement of former controls after 6 months of active therapy confirms benefits are reproducible and reliable.

Transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation, a novel therapeutic approach for central sleep apnea

Central sleep apnea (CSA) is common in heart failure (HF) patients. Traditional treatment of CSA, including continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), adaptive servo ventilation (ASV), oxygen therapy, and CO₂ inhalation, has respective limitations. Transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation (PNS), a novel therapeutic approach for CSA, was proved to be effective and safe. The remedē^® system and related transvenous PNS methods was approved by FDA in 2017, for treating moderate to severe CSA.

How to take arms against central apneas in heart failure

Introduction Despite being a risk mediator in several observational studies, central apneas are currently orphan of treatment in heart failure. After the neutral effects on survival of two randomized controlled trials (RCTs) based on the use of positive airway pressure (the CANPAP and SERVE-HF trials), two alternative hypotheses have been formulated: 1) Periodic breathing/Cheyne-Stokes respiration (PB/CSR) in HF is protective. Indeed, the Naughton's hypothesis assumes that hyperventilation leads to increased cardiac output, lung volume, oxygen storage and reduced muscle sympathetic nerve activity, while central apnea to respiratory muscle rest and hypoxia-induced erythropoiesis. 2) The use of positive airway pressure is just a wrong treatment for PB/CSR. If this is the case, the search for novel potential alternative treatment approaches is mandatory in HF. Areas covered This review will focus on the crucial issue of whether PB/CSR should be treated or not in HF, first by outlining the ideal design of pathophysiological studies to test the Naughton's hypothesis and second by summarizing the treatment strategies so far proposed for PB/CSR in HF and identifying the most promising options to be tested in future RCTs. Expert commentary It is likely that PB/CSR may be compensatory in some cases, but after a certain threshold (to be defined) it becomes maladaptive with negative prognostic meaning in HF. The development of a pathophysiologically based treatment targeting feedback resetting and neurohormonal activation underlying PB/CSR is likely to be the best option to obtain survival benefits in HF.

Sleep-Disordered Breathing and Excessive Daytime Sleepiness

Sleep-related breathing disorders include obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), central sleep apnea, sleep-related hypoventilation, and sleep-related hypoxemia. Excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) is frequently reported by patients with OSA but is not invariably present. The efficacy of positive airway pressure therapy in improving EDS is well established for OSA, but effectiveness is limited by suboptimal adherence. Non-OSA causes of sleepiness should be identified and treated before initiating pharmacotherapy for persistent sleepiness despite adequately treated OSA. Further research on the identification of factors that promote EDS in the setting of OSA is needed to aid in the development of better treatment options.

Non-Mask-based Therapies for Central Sleep Apnea in Patients with Heart Failure

Central sleep apnea is common in heart failure and contributes to morbidity and mortality. Symptoms are often similar to those associated with heart failure and a high index of suspicion is needed. Testing is typically done in the sleep laboratory, but home testing equipment can distinguish between central and obstructive events. Treatments are limited. Mask-based therapies have been the primary treatment. Oxygen has some data but lacks long-term studies. Neurostimulation of the phrenic nerve is a new technology that has demonstrated improvement. Coordination of care between sleep specialists and cardiologists is important as the field of central sleep apnea continues to develop.

The evolution of endovascular electroencephalography: historical perspective and future applications

Current standard practice requires an invasive approach to the recording of electroencephalography (EEG) for epilepsy surgery, deep brain stimulation (DBS), and brain-machine interfaces (BMIs). The development of endovascular techniques offers a minimally invasive route to recording EEG from deep brain structures. This historical perspective aims to describe the technical progress in endovascular EEG by reviewing the first endovascular recordings made using a wire electrode, which was followed by the development of nanowire and catheter recordings and, finally, the most recent progress in stent-electrode recordings. The technical progress in device technology over time and the development of the ability to record chronic intravenous EEG from electrode arrays is described. Future applications for the use of endovascular EEG in the preoperative and operative management of epilepsy surgery are then discussed, followed by the possibility of the technique's future application in minimally invasive operative approaches to DBS and BMI.

Novel Therapies for the Treatment of Central Sleep Apnea

Neurophysiologically, central apnea is due to a temporary cessation of respiratory rhythmogenesis in medullary respiratory networks. Central apneas occur in several disorders and result in pathophysiological consequences, including arousals and desaturation. The 2 most common causes in adults are congestive heart failure and chronic use of opioids to treat pain. Under such circumstances, diagnosis and treatment of central sleep apnea may improve quality of life, morbidity, and mortality. This article discusses recent developments in the treatment of central sleep apnea in heart failure and opioids use.

Mapping for Acute Transvenous Phrenic Nerve Stimulation Study (MAPS Study)

BACKGROUND

Central sleep apnea syndrome, correlated with the occurrence of heart failure, is characterized by periods of insufficient ventilation during sleep. This acute study in 15 patients aims to map the venous system and determine if diaphragmatic movement can be achieved by phrenic nerve stimulation at various locations within the venous system.

METHODS

Subjects underwent a scheduled catheter ablation procedure. During the procedural waiting time, one multielectrode electrophysiology catheter was subsequently placed at the superior and inferior vena cava and the junctions of the left jugular and left brachiocephalic vein and right jugular and right brachiocephalic vein, for phrenic nerve stimulation (1-2 seconds ON/2-3 seconds OFF, 40 Hz, pulse width 210 μs). Diaphragmatic movement was assessed manually and by a breathing mask. During a follow-up assessment between 2 and 4 weeks postprocedure, occurrence of adverse events was assessed.

RESULTS

In all patients diaphragmatic movement was induced at one or more locations using a median threshold of at least 2 V and maximally 7.5 V (i.e., e 3.3 mA, 14.2 mA). The lowest median current to obtain diaphragmatic stimulation without discomfort was found for the right brachiocephalic vein (4.7 mA). In 12/15 patients diaphragmatic movement could be induced without any discomfort, but in three patients hiccups occurred.

CONCLUSION

Diaphragmatic stimulation from the brachiocephalic and caval veins is feasible. Potential side effects should be eliminated by adapting the stimulation pattern. This information could be used to design a catheter, combining cardiac pacing with enhancing diaphragm movement during a sleep apnea episode.

Management of Sleep Apnea Syndromes in Heart Failure

Central sleep apnea (CSA) and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) are prevalent in heart failure (HF) and associated with a worse prognosis. Nocturnal oxygen therapy may decrease CSA events, sympathetic tone, and improve left ventricular ejection fraction, although mortality benefit is unknown. Although treatment of OSA in patients with HF is recommended, therapy for CSA remains controversial. Continuous positive airway pressure use in HF-CSA may improve respiratory events, hemodynamics, and exercise capacity, but not mortality. Adaptive servo ventilation is contraindicated in patients with symptomatic HF with predominant central sleep-disordered events. The role of phrenic nerve stimulation in CSA therapy is promising.

CSA Is Not Beneficial Long Term in Heart Failure Patients with Reduced Ejection Fraction

Central sleep apnea (CSA) affects many patients, with heart failure and results in hypoxia and nor-epinephrine release and is associated with high morbidity and mortality. Recent trials in the treatment of CSA using positive airway pressure therapies have failed to demonstrate improvement in mortality and as a result, the compensatory nature of CSA has been questioned. The detrimental effects from CSA are clear. While there may be a short term compensatory effect, the long term effects cause chronic insult to the cardiovascular system indicating that CSA should be treated, but alternative treatment options need to be considered.

Transvenous neurostimulation for central sleep apnoea: a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Central sleep apnoea is a serious breathing disorder associated with poor outcomes. The remedé system (Respicardia Inc, Minnetonka, MN, USA) is an implantable device which transvenously stimulates a nerve causing diaphragmatic contraction similar to normal breathing. We evaluated the safety and effectiveness of unilateral neurostimulation in patients with central sleep apnoea.

METHODS

We recruited patients from 31 hospital-based centres in Germany, Poland, and the USA in this prospective, multicentre, randomised trial. Participants had to have been medically stable for at least 30 days and have received appropriate guideline recommended therapy, be aged at least 18 years, be expected to tolerate study procedures, and willing and able to comply with study requirements. Eligible patients with an apnoea-hypopnoea index (AHI) of at least 20 events per h, tested by a polysomnography, underwent device implantation and were randomly assigned (1:1) by a computer-generated method stratified by site to either stimulation (treatment) or no stimulation (control) for 6 months. The primary effectiveness endpoint in the intention-to-treat population was the comparison of the proportions of patients in the treatment versus control groups achieving a 50% or greater AHI reduction from baseline to 6 months, measured by a full-night polysomnography assessed by masked investigators in a core laboratory. The primary safety endpoint of 12-month freedom from serious adverse events related to the procedure, system, or therapy was evaluated in all patients. This trial is active, but not recruiting, and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01816776).

FINDINGS

Between April 17, 2013, and May 28, 2015, we randomly assigned 151 eligible patients to the treatment (n=73) or control (n=78) groups. In the analysis of the intention-to-treat population, significantly more patients in the treatment group (35 [51%] of 68) had an AHI reduction from baseline of 50% or greater at 6 months than had those in the control group (eight [11%] of 73; difference between groups 41%, 95% CI 25-54, p<0·0001). 138 (91%) of 151 patients had no serious-related adverse events at 12 months. Seven (9%) cases of related-serious adverse events occurred in the control group and six (8%) cases were reported in the treatment group. Seven patients died (unrelated to implant, system, or therapy), four deaths (two in treatment group and two in control group) during the 6-month randomisation period when neurostimulation was delivered to only the treatment group and was off in the control group, and three deaths between 6 months and 12 months of follow-up when all patients received neurostimulation. 27 (37%) of 73 patients in the treatment group reported non-serious therapy-related discomfort that was resolved with simple system reprogramming in 26 (36%) patients, but was unresolved in one (1%) patient.

INTERPRETATION

Transvenous neurostimulation significantly reduced the severity of central sleep apnoea, including improvements in sleep metrics, and was well tolerated. The clinically meaningful effects of the therapy are supported by the concordant improvements in oxygenation and quality of life, making transvenous neurostimulation a promising therapeutic approach for central sleep apnoea.

FUNDING

Respicardia Inc.

Acute improvement of pulmonary hemodynamics does not alleviate Cheyne-Stokes respiration in chronic heart failure-a randomized, controlled, double-blind, crossover trial

OBJECTIVES

This randomized, controlled trial aimed to investigate whether acute improvement of pulmonary congestion would reduce the severity of Cheyne-Stokes respiration (CSR) in patients with chronic heart failure (CHF).

METHODS

Twenty-one consecutive patients with CHF and CSR (apnea-hypopnea index [AHI] ≥15/h) underwent right heart catheterization with titration of intravenous (IV) glyceryltrinitrate (GTN) to a maximum tolerable dosage and inhalation of iloprost 10 μg/mL after a washout phase. Maximum tolerable dosages of GTN and iloprost were randomly applied during full cardiorespiratory polysomnography within two split-night procedures and compared with IV or inhaled sodium chloride (NaCl) 0.9 %, respectively.

RESULTS

GTN (6.2 ± 1.5 mg/h) and iloprost significantly lowered \mean pulmonary artery pressure (20.1 ± 9.0 to 11.6 ± 4.2 mmHg, p < 0.001 and 16.9 ± 7.9 to 14.2 ± 6.4 mmHg, p < 0.01, respectively). Pulmonary capillary wedge pressure was only reduced by GTN (14.0 ± 5.6 to 7.2 ± 3.9 mmHg, p < 0.001), and there was no significant change in the cardiac index. Sleep studies revealed no significant improvement in markers of CSR severity, including AHI, central apnea index, and CSR cycle length following GTN or iloprost treatment. Significant decreases in blood pressure, mean oxygen saturation, and S3 sleep were documented during GTN infusion.

CONCLUSIONS

Acute improvement of pulmonary congestion by GTN had no immediate impact on CSR severity. Future investigations must therefore include longer treatment periods and treatment regimens that have positive, rather than negative, additional effects on peripheral and central chemoreceptors and sleep structure.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

German Clinical Trial Registry-ID:DRKS00000467 ( www.germanctr.de ).