ArticleSleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung2023
Adaptive servo-ventilation and mortality in patients with systolic heart failure and central sleep apnea: a single-center experience.
Article in Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Central sleep apnoea: not just one phenotype.European respiratory review : an official journal of the European Respiratory Society · 2024Review
- Aortic stenosis and sleep disordered breathing: The effects of interventional management.Science progressReview
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 at 3 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundCentral sleep apnea (CSA) is associated with increased mortality and morbidity in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Treatment of CSA with a certain type of adaptive servo-ventilation (ASV) device that targets minute ventilation (ASVmv) was found to be harmful in these patients. A newer generation of ASV devices that target peak flow (ASVpf) is presumed to have different effects on ventilation and airway patency. We analyzed our registry of patients with HFrEF-CSA to examine the effect of exposure to ASV and role of each type of ASV device on mortality.
methodsThis is a retrospective cohort study in patients with HFrEF and CSA who were treated with ASV devices between 2008 and 2015 at a single institution. Mortality data were collected through the institutional data honest broker. Usage data were obtained from vendors' and manufacturers' servers. Median follow-up was 64 months.
resultsThe registry included 90 patients with HFrEF-CSA who were prescribed ASV devices. Applying a 3-h-per-night usage cutoff, we found a survival advantage at 64 months for those who used the ASV device above the cutoff (n = 59; survival 76%) compared to those who did not (n = 31; survival 49%; hazard ratio 0.44; CI 95%, 0.20 to 0.97; P = 0.04). The majority (n = 77) of patients received ASVpf devices with automatically adjusting end-expiratory pressure (EPAP) and the remainder (n = 13) received ASVmv devices mostly with fixed EPAP (n = 12). There was a trend towards a negative correlation between ASVmv with fixed EPAP and survival.
conclusionIn this population of patients with HFrEF and CSA, there was no evidence that usage of ASV devices was associated with increased mortality. However, there was evidence of differential effects of type of ASV technology on mortality.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What 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.