Dataset Information

SAS CARE 2 - a randomized study of CPAP in patients with obstructive sleep disordered breathing following ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack.

ABSTRACT:

Objective/background

The benefit of Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) treatment following ischemic stroke in patients with obstructive sleep-disordered breathing (SDB) is unclear. We set out to investigate this open question in a randomized controlled trial as part of the SAS-CARE study.

Patients/methods

Non-sleepy patients (ESS < 10) with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) and obstructive SDB (AHI ≥ 20) 3 months post-stroke were randomized 1:1 to CPAP treatment (CPAP+) or standard care. Primary outcome was the occurrence of vascular events (TIA/stroke, myocardial infarction/revascularization, hospitalization for heart failure or unstable angina) or death within 24 months post-stroke. Secondary outcomes included Modified Rankin Scale (mRS) and Barthel Index.

Results

Among 238 SAS-CARE patients 41 (17%) non-sleepy obstructive SDB patients were randomized to CPAP (n = 19) or standard care (n = 22). Most patients (80%) had stroke and were males (78%), mean age was 64 ± 7 years and mean NIHSS score 0.6 ± 1.0 (range: 0-5). The primary endpoint was met by one patient in the standard care arm (a new stroke). In an intent-to treat analysis disregarding adherence, this corresponds to an absolute risk difference of 4.5% or an NNT = 22. mRS and Barthel Index were stable and similar between arms. CPAP adherence was sufficient in 60% of evaluable patients at month 24.

Conclusion

No benefit of CPAP started three months post-stroke was found in terms of new cardio- and cerebrovascular events over 2 years. This may be related to the small size of this study, the mild stoke severity, the exclusion of sleepy patients, the delayed start of treatment, and the overall low event rate.

SUBMITTER: Bernasconi C

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8041126 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundPatients with ischemic stroke or transient ischemic attack (TIA) are at increased risk for future cardiovascular events despite current preventive therapies. The identification of insulin resistance as a risk factor for stroke and myocardial infarction raised the possibility that pioglitazone, which improves insulin sensitivity, might benefit patients with cerebrovascular disease.MethodsIn this multicenter, double-blind trial, we randomly assigned 3876 patients who had had a recent ischemic stroke or TIA to receive either pioglitazone (target dose, 45 mg daily) or placebo. Eligible patients did not have diabetes but were found to have insulin resistance on the basis of a score of more than 3.0 on the homeostasis model assessment of insulin resistance (HOMA-IR) index. The primary outcome was fatal or nonfatal stroke or myocardial infarction.ResultsBy 4.8 years, a primary outcome had occurred in 175 of 1939 patients (9.0%) in the pioglitazone group and in 228 of 1937 (11.8%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio in the pioglitazone group, 0.76; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.62 to 0.93; P=0.007). Diabetes developed in 73 patients (3.8%) and 149 patients (7.7%), respectively (hazard ratio, 0.48; 95% CI, 0.33 to 0.69; P<0.001). There was no significant between-group difference in all-cause mortality (hazard ratio, 0.93; 95% CI, 0.73 to 1.17; P=0.52). Pioglitazone was associated with a greater frequency of weight gain exceeding 4.5 kg than was placebo (52.2% vs. 33.7%, P<0.001), edema (35.6% vs. 24.9%, P<0.001), and bone fracture requiring surgery or hospitalization (5.1% vs. 3.2%, P=0.003).ConclusionsIn this trial involving patients without diabetes who had insulin resistance along with a recent history of ischemic stroke or TIA, the risk of stroke or myocardial infarction was lower among patients who received pioglitazone than among those who received placebo. Pioglitazone was also associated with a lower risk of diabetes but with higher risks of weight gain, edema, and fracture. (Funded by the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00091949.).

Project description:Study objectivesObstructive sleep apnea is associated with neurobehavioral dysfunction, but the relationship between disease severity as measured by the apnea-hypopnea index and neurobehavioral morbidity is unclear. The objective of our study is to compare the neurobehavioral morbidity of mild sleep-disordered breathing versus obstructive sleep apnea.MethodsChildren 3-12 years old recruited for mild sleep-disordered breathing (snoring with obstructive apnea-hypopnea index < 3) into the Pediatric Adenotonsillectomy Trial for Snoring were compared to children 5-9 years old recruited for obstructive sleep apnea (obstructive apnea-hypopnea 2-30) into the Childhood Adenotonsillectomy Trial. Baseline demographic, polysomnographic, and neurobehavioral outcomes were compared using univariable and multivariable analysis.ResultsThe sample included 453 participants with obstructive sleep apnea (median obstructive apnea-hypopnea index 5.7) and 459 participants with mild sleep-disordered breathing (median obstructive apnea-hypopnea index 0.5). By polysomnography, participants with obstructive sleep apnea had poorer sleep efficiency and more arousals. Children with mild sleep-disordered breathing had more abnormal executive function scores (adjusted odds ratio 1.96, 95% CI 1.30-2.94) compared to children with obstructive sleep apnea. There were also elevated Conners scores for inattention (adjusted odds ratio 3.16, CI 1.98-5.02) and hyperactivity (adjusted odds ratio 2.82, CI 1.83-4.34) in children recruited for mild sleep-disordered breathing.ConclusionsAbnormal executive function, inattention, and hyperactivity were more common in symptomatic children recruited into a trial for mild sleep-disordered breathing compared to children recruited into a trial for obstructive sleep apnea. Young, snoring children with only minimally elevated apnea-hypopnea levels may still be at risk for deficits in executive function and attention.Trial registrationPediatric Adenotonsillectomy for Snoring (PATS), NCT02562040; Childhood Adenotonsillectomy Trial (CHAT), NCT00560859.