ArticleSleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung2020
Interventional techniques to increase implantation success of transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation for central sleep apnea treatment.
Article in Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Improving Nocturnal Hypoxemic Burden with Transvenous Phrenic Nerve Stimulation for the Treatment of Central Sleep Apnea.Journal of cardiovascular translational research · 2021Trial
- Phrenic Nerve Stimulation Improves Physical Performance and Hypoxemia in Heart Failure Patients with Central Sleep Apnea.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Article
- Central Sleep Apnea in Patients with Heart Failure-How to Screen, How to Treat.Current heart failure reports · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeCentral sleep apnea (CSA) is a highly common comorbidity in heart failure (HF) patients and is known to deteriorate quality of life and prognosis. Effective treatment options are scarce. Transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation (PNS) has been shown to be effective and safe in CSA treatment in HF. However, lead implantation may be difficult or fail due to anatomical or technical challenges. We report novel and innovative approaches applying different interventional techniques to enhance PNS implantation success, allowing otherwise missing CSA treatment.
methodsTwenty-seven consecutive HF patients (86% male, mean age: 69 ± 11 years; reduced left ventricular ejection fraction in 16 patients (57%)) were included in this study who were unable to tolerate or had contraindications for mask-based therapy. We evaluated PNS total implantation success, procedural characteristics, and feasibility and success rates of intravascular interventions to facilitate PNS lead implantation in otherwise ineffective procedures.
resultsSeven lead implantation attempts (24%) required additional intravascular interventional action to facilitate successful implantation, mainly consisting of balloon angioplasties to allow optimal PNS lead placement. Two procedures remained unsuccessful and two patients underwent a second procedure due to stimulation side effects and lead fracture respectively. All over, no complications resulted from application of interventional techniques to achieve a 93% implantation success rate.
conclusionTransvenous PNS lead placement for CSA treatment can be difficult and challenging. However, interventional intravascular techniques markedly increase implantation success and thereby allow application of this therapy for effective CSA treatment in most patients without additional complications.
Indexed as
Identifiers
31407159What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.