Dataset Information

Adaptive servo ventilation for sleep apnoea in heart failure: the FACE study 3-month data.

ABSTRACT:

Rationale

Adaptive servo ventilation (ASV) is contraindicated in patients with systolic heart failure (HF) who have a left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) below 45% and predominant central sleep apnoea (CSA). However, the effects of ASV in other HF subgroups have not been clearly defined.

Objective

The European, multicentre, prospective, observational cohort trial, FACE, evaluated the effects of ASV therapy on morbidity and mortality in patients with HF with sleep-disordered breathing (SDB); 3-month outcomes in patient subgroups defined using latent class analysis (LCA) are presented.

Methods

Consecutive patients with HF with predominant CSA (±obstructive sleep apnoea) indicated for ASV were included from 2009 to 2018; the non-ASV group included patients who refused/were noncompliant with ASV. The primary endpoint was time to composite first event (all-cause death, lifesaving cardiovascular intervention or unplanned hospitalisation for worsening of chronic HF).

Measurements and main results

Baseline assessments were performed in 503 patients, and 482 underwent 3-month follow-up. LCA identified six discrete patient clusters characterised by variations in LVEF, SDB type, age, comorbidities and ASV acceptance. The 3- month rate of primary outcome events was significantly higher in cluster 1 patients (predominantly men, low LVEF, severe HF, CSA; 13.9% vs 1.5%-5% in other clusters, p<0.01).

Conclusion

For the first time, our data identified homogeneous patient clusters representing clinically relevant subgroups relating to SDB management in patients with HF with different ASV usage, each with a different prognosis. This may improve patient phenotyping in clinical practice and allow individualisation of therapy.

SUBMITTER: Tamisier R

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8762030 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Central sleep apnea is associated with poor prognosis and death in patients with heart failure. Adaptive servo-ventilation is a therapy that uses a noninvasive ventilator to treat central sleep apnea by delivering servo-controlled inspiratory pressure support on top of expiratory positive airway pressure. We investigated the effects of adaptive servo-ventilation in patients who had heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and predominantly central sleep apnea. METHODS:We randomly assigned 1325 patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction of 45% or less, an apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) of 15 or more events (occurrences of apnea or hypopnea) per hour, and a predominance of central events to receive guideline-based medical treatment with adaptive servo-ventilation or guideline-based medical treatment alone (control). The primary end point in the time-to-event analysis was the first event of death from any cause, lifesaving cardiovascular intervention (cardiac transplantation, implantation of a ventricular assist device, resuscitation after sudden cardiac arrest, or appropriate lifesaving shock), or unplanned hospitalization for worsening heart failure. RESULTS:In the adaptive servo-ventilation group, the mean AHI at 12 months was 6.6 events per hour. The incidence of the primary end point did not differ significantly between the adaptive servo-ventilation group and the control group (54.1% and 50.8%, respectively; hazard ratio, 1.13; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.97 to 1.31; P=0.10). All-cause mortality and cardiovascular mortality were significantly higher in the adaptive servo-ventilation group than in the control group (hazard ratio for death from any cause, 1.28; 95% CI, 1.06 to 1.55; P=0.01; and hazard ratio for cardiovascular death, 1.34; 95% CI, 1.09 to 1.65; P=0.006). CONCLUSIONS:Adaptive servo-ventilation had no significant effect on the primary end point in patients who had heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and predominantly central sleep apnea, but all-cause and cardiovascular mortality were both increased with this therapy. (Funded by ResMed and others; SERVE-HF ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT00733343.).

Project description:PURPOSE:FACE is a prospective cohort study designed to assess the effect of adding adaptive servoventilation (ASV) to standard care on morbidity and mortality in patients with chronic heart failure (HF) with preserved (HFpEF), mid-range (HFmrEF) or reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF) who have sleep-disordered breathing (SDB) with an indication for ASV. We describe the study design, ongoing data collection and baseline participant characteristics. PARTICIPANTS:Consecutive patients with HFpEF, HFmrEF or HFrEF plus SDB with central sleep apnoea (CSA) and indication for ASV were enrolled in the study cohort between November 2009 and December 2018; the ASV group includes those treated with ASV and the control group consists of patients who refused ASV or stopped treatment early. Follow-up is based on standard clinical practice, with visits at inclusion, after 3, 12 and 24 months of follow-up. Primary endpoint is the time to first event: all-cause death or unplanned hospitalisation (or unplanned prolongation of a planned hospitalisation) for worsening of HF, cardiovascular death or unplanned hospitalisation for worsening of HF, and all-cause death or all-cause unplanned hospitalisation. FINDINGS TO DATE:503 patients have been enrolled, mean age of 72 years, 88% male, 31% with HFrEF. HF was commonly of ischaemic origin, and the number of comorbidities was high. SDB was severe (median Apnoea-Hypopnoea Index 42/hour), and CSA was the main indication for ASV (69%). HF was highly symptomatic; most patients were in NYHA class II (38%) or III (29%). FUTURE PLANS:Patient follow-up is ongoing. Given the heterogeneous nature of the enrolled population, a decision was made to use latent class analysis to define homogeneous patient subgroups, and then evaluate outcomes by cluster, and in the ASV and control groups (overall and within patient clusters). First analysis will be performed after 3 months, a second analysis at the 2-year follow-up. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:NCT01831128; Pre-results.

Project description:BackgroundSleep-disordered breathing (SDB) is highly prevalent in acute ischaemic stroke and is associated with worse functional outcome and increased risk of recurrence. Recent meta-analyses suggest the possibility of beneficial effects of nocturnal ventilatory treatments (continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) or adaptive servo-ventilation (ASV)) in stroke patients with SDB. The evidence for a favourable effect of early SDB treatment in acute stroke patients remains, however, uncertain.MethodseSATIS is an open-label, multicentre (6 centres in 4 countries), interventional, randomized controlled trial in patients with acute ischaemic stroke and significant SDB. Primary outcome of the study is the impact of immediate SDB treatment with non-invasive ASV on infarct progression measured with magnetic resonance imaging in the first 3 months after stroke. Secondary outcomes are the effects of immediate SDB treatment vs non-treatment on clinical outcome (independence in daily functioning, new cardio-/cerebrovascular events including death, cognition) and physiological parameters (blood pressure, endothelial functioning/arterial stiffness). After respiratory polygraphy in the first night after stroke, patients are classified as having significant SDB (apnoea-hypopnoea index (AHI) > 20/h) or no SDB (AHI < 5/h). Patients with significant SDB are randomized to treatment (ASV+ group) or no treatment (ASV- group) from the second night after stroke. In all patients, clinical, physiological and magnetic resonance imaging studies are performed between day 1 (visit 1) and days 4-7 (visit 4) and repeated at day 90 ± 7 (visit 6) after stroke.DiscussionThe trial will give information on the feasibility and efficacy of ASV treatment in patients with acute stroke and SDB and allows assessing the impact of SDB on stroke outcome. Diagnosing and treating SDB during the acute phase of stroke is not yet current medical practice. Evidence in favour of ASV treatment from a randomized multicentre trial may lead to a change in stroke care and to improved outcomes.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov NCT02554487 , retrospectively registered on 16 September 2015 (actual study start date, 13 August 2015), and www.kofam.ch (SNCTP000001521).

Project description:BackgroundsTo explain the excess cardiovascular mortality observed in the SERVE-HF study, it was hypothesized that the high-pressure ASV default settings used lead to inappropriate ventilation, cascading negative consequences (i.e. not only pro-arrythmogenic effects through metabolic/electrolyte abnormalities, but also lower cardiac output). The aims of this study are: i) to describe ASV-settings for long-term ASV-populations in real-life conditions; ii) to describe the associated minute-ventilations (MV) and therapeutic pressures for servo-controlled-flow versus servo-controlled-volume devices (ASV-F Philips®-devices versus ASV-V ResMed®-devices).MethodsThe OTRLASV-study is a cross-sectional, 5-centre study including patients who underwent ASV-treatment for at least 1 year. The eight participating clinicians were free to adjust ASV settings, which were compared among i) initial diagnosed sleep-disordered-breathing (SBD) groups (Obstructive-Sleep-Apnea (OSA), Central-Sleep-Apnea (CSA), Treatment-Emergent-Central-Sleep-Apnea (TECSA)), and ii) unsupervised groups (k-means clusters). To generate these clusters, baseline and follow-up variables were used (age, sex, body mass index (BMI), initial diagnosed Obstructive-Apnea-Index, initial diagnosed Central-Apnea-Index, Continuous-Positive-Airway-Pressure used before ASV treatment, presence of cardiopathy, and presence of a reduced left-ventricular-ejection-fraction (LVEF)). ASV-data were collected using the manufacturer's software for 6 months.ResultsOne hundred seventy-seven patients (87.57% male) were analysed with a median (IQ25-75) initial Apnea-Hypopnea-Index of 50 (38-62)/h, an ASV-treatment duration of 2.88 (1.76-4.96) years, 61.58% treated with an ASV-V. SDB groups did not differ in ASV settings, MV or therapeutic pressures. In contrast, the five generated k-means clusters did (generally described as follows: (C1) male-TECSA-cardiopathy, (C2) male-mostly-CSA-cardiopathy, (C3) male-mostly-TECSA-no cardiopathy, (C4) female-mostly-elevated BMI-TECSA-cardiopathy, (C5) male-mostly-OSA-low-LVEF). Of note, the male-mostly-OSA-low-LVEF-cluster-5 had significantly lower fixed end-expiratory-airway-pressure (EPAP) settings versus C1 (p = 0.029) and C4 (p = 0.007). Auto-EPAP usage was higher in the male-mostly-TECSA-no cardiopathy-cluster-3 versus C1 (p = 0.006) and C2 (p < 0.001). MV differences between ASV-F (p = 0.002) and ASV-V (p < 0.001) were not homogenously distributed across clusters, suggesting specific cluster and ASV-algorithm interactions. Individual ASV-data suggest that the hyperventilation risk is not related to the cluster nor the ASV-monitoring type.ConclusionsReal-life ASV settings are associated with combinations of baseline and follow-up variables wherein cardiological variables remain clinically meaningful. At the patient level, a hyperventilation risk exists regardless of cluster or ASV-monitoring type, spotlighting a future role of MV-telemonitoring in the interest of patient-safety.Trial registrationThe OTRLASV study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (Identifier: NCT02429986 ). 1 April 2015.