Key result
Nocturnal oxygen therapy fails to reduce major cardiovascular events or death vs. sham.
Why the study?
Does nocturnal oxygen therapy reduce the composite of mortality, lifesaving cardiovascular intervention, or unplanned HF hospitalization in patients with central sleep apnea and HFrEF?
RCT (n=98)
Double-blind
Randomized
Yes
Does nocturnal oxygen therapy reduce the composite of mortality, lifesaving cardiovascular intervention, or unplanned HF hospitalization in patients with central sleep apnea and HFrEF?
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
In patients with HFrEF and central sleep apnea, nocturnal oxygen therapy did not demonstrate clinical effectiveness for reducing cardiovascular events, though the trial was prematurely terminated.
Rationale There are insufficient data to inform the management of central sleep apnea (CSA) in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (HFrEF). Nocturnal oxygen therapy (NOT) has been postulated to benefit CSA patients with HFrEF but has not been rigorously studied. Objectives To compare NOT with sham NOT (control) in heart failure (HF) patients receiving guideline-based HF therapy on the composite outcome of first occurrence of either mortality due to any cause, a lifesaving cardiovascular intervention, or an unplanned hospitalization for worsening HF, together with other secondary outcomes. Methods A multisite, double-blind, sham-controlled randomized clinical trial was conducted from September 2019 to December 2021, when the study was terminated prematurely because of slow enrollment. Cox proportional-hazards regression models were used to analyze time-to-event outcomes. Results Ninety-eight participants (mean left ventricular ejection fraction, 27.8 ± 9.6%; mean central apnea–hypopnea index, 30.6 ± 18.2 events/h) were randomized and followed for an average of 10.8 ± 6.3 months. A total of 22 events met the criteria for the primary composite endpoint. The hazard ratio comparing the NOT group with the control group according to time to first event, adjusted for the stratification factor (hospitalization for HF in the past 12 mo and/or elevated outpatient brain natriuretic peptide or N-terminal pro–B-type natriuretic peptide concentration) was 1.46 (95% confidence interval, 0.65–3.29). No group differences in changes in patient-reported outcomes (HF-specific quality of life [Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire], sleep disturbance and sleep-related impairment [Patient-reported Outcomes Measurement Information System], generic health [EQ-5D], or mood [Patient Health Questionnaire-8]) were observed at 6 months. Polysomnography showed improved indices of sleep-disordered breathing (apnea–hypopnea index, central apnea–hypopnea index, and time at oxygen saturation < 90%) with oxygen compared with room air. Conclusions Although NOT improves CSA and overnight oxygenation, this prematurely terminated study does not provide support for the clinical effectiveness of NOT in patients with CSA and HFrEF. Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT 03745898).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Redline et al. (2025) conducted an RCT in Central sleep apnea in patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (n=98). Nocturnal oxygen therapy vs. Sham nocturnal oxygen therapy was evaluated on Composite of first occurrence of mortality due to any cause, a lifesaving cardiovascular intervention, or an unplanned hospitalization for worsening HF (HR 1.46, 95% CI 0.65-3.29). Nocturnal oxygen therapy did not improve the composite of mortality, lifesaving cardiovascular intervention, or worsening HF hospitalization compared to sham (HR 1.46; 95% CI 0.65-3.29).
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: