Key result
CPAP improves myocardial systolic function in HF, counteracting OSA-associated mortality risks.
Why the study?
Does continuous positive airway pressure improve clinical outcomes in patients with heart failure and obstructive sleep apnea?
Does continuous positive airway pressure improve clinical outcomes in patients with heart failure and obstructive sleep apnea?
While CPAP improves physiological parameters and systolic function in HF patients with OSA, large-scale randomized trials are required to determine its impact on morbidity and mortality.
Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) exposes the cardiovascular system to intermittent hypoxia, oxidative stress, systemic inflammation, exaggerated negative intrathoracic pressure, sympathetic overactivation, and elevated blood pressure (BP). These can impair myocardial contractility and cause development and progression of heart failure (HF). Epidemiological studies have shown significant independent associations between OSA and HF. On the other hand, recent prospective observational studies reported a significant association between the presence of moderate to severe OSA and increased risk of mortality in patients with HF. In randomized trials, treating OSA with continuous positive airway pressure suppressed sympathetic activity, lowered BP, and improved myocardial systolic function in patients with HF. These data suggest the potential for treatment of OSA to improve clinical outcomes for patients with HF. However, large-scale randomized trials with sufficient statistical power will be needed to ascertain whether treatment of OSA will prevent development of, or reduce morbidity and mortality from HF.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kasai et al. (2011) conducted a review in Obstructive Sleep Apnea and Heart Failure. Continuous positive airway pressure was evaluated. Obstructive sleep apnea is associated with increased mortality in heart failure, while continuous positive airway pressure improves myocardial systolic function.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: