Effects of dynamic bilevel positive airway pressure support on central sleep apnea in men with heart failure

Department of Internal Medicine II, University of Regensburg, Franz-Josef-Straubeta-Allee 11, 93042 Regensburg, Germany.
Chest (Impact Factor: 7.13). 07/2008; 134(1):61-6. DOI: 10.1378/chest.07-1620
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT Treatment with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) improves cardiac function in chronic heart failure (CHF) patients with central sleep apnea (CSA)-Cheyne-Stokes respiration (CSR) by stabilizing ventilation, but frequently central apneas and hypopneas persist. Our objective was to test the hypothesis that flow-targeted dynamic bilevel positive airway pressure (BPAP) support (BiPAP autoSV; Respironics; Murrysville, PA) effectively suppresses CSR-CSA in CHF patients.
We studied 14 CHF patients with CSR-CSA (and residual CSA on positive airway pressure therapy) during 3 consecutive nights: (1) diagnostic polysomnography, (2) CPAP (n=10) or BPAP (n=4) titration, and (3) dynamic flow-targeted dynamic BPAP support with an expiratory positive airway pressure (EPAP) set to suppress obstructive respiratory events, and an inspiratory positive airway pressure (IPAP) dynamically ranging between 0 and 15 cm H2O above the EPAP.
CPAP or BPAP significantly reduced the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) [mean+/-SD, 46+/-4 events/h to 22+/-4 events/h; p=0.001] compared to the first night without treatment. Flow-targeted dynamic BPAP support (mean EPAP, 6.5+/-1.7 cm H2O; maximal IPAP, 21.9+/-2.1 cm H2O) further reduced the AHI to 4+/-1/h of sleep compared to the untreated (p<0.001) and CPAP or BPAP night (p=0.002). After the first night of flow-targeted dynamic BPAP support, patients rated on an analog scale (range, 0 to 10) the treatment as comfortable (6.9+/-0.6), and the sleep quality as improved compared to previous nights (7.4+/-0.6).
Flow-targeted dynamic BPAP support effectively suppresses CSR-CSA in patients with CHF and is well tolerated.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background: Although coexisting obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and Cheyne-Stokes respiration (CSR) occur frequently in patients with heart diseases, optimal treatment remains unclear. Positive airway pressure (PAP) effectively treats OSA and adaptive servo-ventilation (ASV) has been shown to improve CSR. We compared a new treatment algorithm combining automatic continuous positive airway pressure (APAP) and ASV (anticyclic modulated ventilation, ACMV) versus continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). Methods: Thirty-nine patients (35 male, four female; aged 65.5 +/- 9.7 years; body mass index, 31.0 +/- 5.9 kg/m(2)) with underlying heart disease and coexisting OSA and CSR were enrolled. After diagnostic polysomnography (PSG) and CPAP titration, patients were randomized either to CPAP or to ACMV for four weeks of treatment in a crossover design. Results: Total apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) was 49.0 +/- 18.8/h at baseline, 12.3 +/- 14.6/h with CPAP (P < 0.001 vs baseline), and 3.7 +/- 5.6/h with ACMV (P < 0.001 vs baseline and vs CPAP). Obstructive AHI was 20.7 +/- 14.4/h at baseline, 5.1 +/- 9.3/h with CPAP (P < 0.001 vs baseline), and 0.4 +/- 0.4/h with ACMV (P < 0.001 vs baseline and vs CPAP). Central AHI was 28.3 +/- 13.4/h at baseline, 7.2 +/- 9.7/h with CPAP (P < 0.001 vs baseline) and 3.3 +/- 5.4/h with ACMV (P < 0.001 vs baseline and vs CPAP). Ejection fraction was increased significantly (from 38.6 +/- 15.6 to 44.4 +/- 12.2%) only with ACMV. Subjective sleepiness significantly improved only with CPAP whereas objective sleep quality and treatment adherence were not different between both treatment modalities. Conclusion: ACMV is an effective treatment option in patients with coexisting OSA and CSR. It is superior to CPAP in reducing total AHI as well as obstructive and central AHI.
    Sleep Medicine 04/2014; 15(8). DOI:10.1016/j.sleep.2014.02.012 · 3.10 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Adaptive servoventilation (ASV) is an automated treatment modality used to treat many types of sleep-disordered breathing. Although default settings are available, clinician-specified settings determined in the sleep laboratory are preferred. Depending on the device, setting choices may include a fixed expiratory positive airway pressure (EPAP) level or a range for autotitrating EPAP; minimum and maximum inspiratory positive airway pressure or pressure support values; and type of backup rate algorithm or a selectable fixed backup rate. ASV was initially proposed for treatment of central sleep apnea and Hunter-Cheyne-Stokes breathing associated with congestive heart failure (CHF), and numerous observational studies have demonstrated value in this setting. Other studies have reported varying efficacy in patients with complex sleep apnea syndromes, including those with mixtures of obstructive and central sleep-disordered breathing associated with CHF, renal failure, or OSA with central apneas developing on conventional positive airway pressure therapy. Patients with opioid-induced sleep apnea, both obstructive and central, may also respond to ASV. The variability in response to ASV in a given patient along with the myriad choices of specific models and settings demand a high degree of expertise from the clinician. Finally, randomized controlled studies are needed to determine long-term clinical efficacy of these devices.
    Chest 09/2014; 146(3):858-868. DOI:10.1378/chest.13-1778 · 7.13 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Positive airway pressure therapy for hypoventilation syndromes can significantly improve health-related quality of life (HR-QOL), healthcare costs, and even mortality. The sleep-disordered breathing in such individuals are quite complex and require sophisticated devices with algorithms that are designed to accurately detect and effectively treat respiratory events that includes hypoventilation, upper airway obstruction, lower airway obstruction, central apneas and central hypopneas and reduce the work of breathing while maintaining breathing comfort.
    Sleep Medicine Clinics 09/2014; DOI:10.1016/j.jsmc.2014.06.002