Guideline Update

May 2016
The AASM has made an important update to the recommendation in this paper
regarding use of adaptive servo-ventilation (ASV) for treatment of central sleep apnea
syndromes (CSAS) related to chronic heart failure (CHF). (See the citation below.) This
update stems from the May 2015 ResMed Field Safety Notice indicating that patients
with symptomatic CHF and reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF ≤45%) using
ASV for treatment of CSAS are at an increased risk of cardiovascular mortality.

The updated recommendations in the paper cited below are an essential supplement to
this practice parameters document.

• Aurora RN, Bista SR, Casey KR, Chowdhuri S, Kristo DA, Mallea JM, Ramar K,
Rowley JA, Zak RS, Heald JL. Updated adaptive servo-ventilation
recommendations for the 2012 AASM guideline: “The Treatment of Central Sleep
Apnea Syndromes in Adults: Practice Parameters with an Evidence-Based
Literature Review and Meta-Analyses”. J Clin Sleep Med 2016;12(5):757–761.
https://doi.org/10.5664/jcsm.5812
 TREATMENT OF CENTRAL SLEEP APNEA SYNDROME IN ADULTS
http://dx.doi.org/10.5665/sleep.1580

The Treatment of Central Sleep Apnea Syndromes in Adults: Practice

Parameters with an Evidence-Based Literature Review and Meta-Analyses
R. Nisha Aurora, MD1; Susmita Chowdhuri, MD2; Kannan Ramar, MD3; Sabin R. Bista, MD4; Kenneth R. Casey, MD, MPH5; Carin I. Lamm, MD6;
David A. Kristo, MD7; Jorge M. Mallea, MD8; James A. Rowley, MD9; Rochelle S. Zak, MD10; Sharon L. Tracy, PhD11
1
Johns Hopkins University, School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD; 2Sleep Medicine Section, John D. Dingell VA Medical Center and Wayne State
University, Detroit, MI; 3Mayo Clinic, Rochester, MN; 4University of Nebraska Medical Center, Omaha, NE; 5Cincinnati Veterans Affairs Medical
Center, Cincinnati, OH; 6Children’s Hospital of NY – Presbyterian, Columbia University Medical Center, New York, NY; 7University of Pittsburgh,
Pittsburgh, PA; 8Mayo Clinic Florida, Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care, Jacksonville, FL; 9Division of Pulmonary, Critical Care, and Sleep
Medicine, Wayne State University School of Medicine, Detroit, MI; 10Sleep Disorders Center, University of California, San Francisco, San Francisco
CA; 11American Academy of Sleep Medicine, Darien, IL

The International Classification of Sleep Disorders, Second Edition (ICSD-2) distinguishes 5 subtypes of central sleep apnea syndromes (CSAS) in
adults. Review of the literature suggests that there are two basic mechanisms that trigger central respiratory events: (1) post-hyperventilation cen-
tral apnea, which may be triggered by a variety of clinical conditions, and (2) central apnea secondary to hypoventilation, which has been described
with opioid use. The preponderance of evidence on the treatment of CSAS supports the use of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). Much
of the evidence comes from investigations on CSAS related to congestive heart failure (CHF), but other subtypes of CSAS appear to respond to
CPAP as well. Limited evidence is available to support alternative therapies in CSAS subtypes. The recommendations for treatment of CSAS are
summarized as follows:
• CPAP therapy targeted to normalize the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) is indicated for the initial treatment of CSAS related to CHF. (STANDARD)
• Nocturnal oxygen therapy is indicated for the treatment of CSAS related to CHF. (STANDARD)
• Adaptive Servo-Ventilation (ASV) targeted to normalize the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) is indicated for the treatment of CSAS related to
CHF. (STANDARD)
• BPAP therapy in a spontaneous timed (ST) mode targeted to normalize the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) may be considered for the treatment
of CSAS related to CHF only if there is no response to adequate trials of CPAP, ASV, and oxygen therapies. (OPTION)
• The following therapies have limited supporting evidence but may be considered for the treatment of CSAS related to CHF after optimization
of standard medical therapy, if PAP therapy is not tolerated, and if accompanied by close clinical follow-up: acetazolamide and theophylline.
(OPTION)
• Positive airway pressure therapy may be considered for the treatment of primary CSAS. (OPTION)
• Acetazolamide has limited supporting evidence but may be considered for the treatment of primary CSAS. (OPTION)
• The use of zolpidem and triazolam may be considered for the treatment of primary CSAS only if the patient does not have underlying risk
factors for respiratory depression. (OPTION)
• The following possible treatment options for CSAS related to end-stage renal disease may be considered: CPAP, supplemental oxygen,
bicarbonate buffer use during dialysis, and nocturnal dialysis. (OPTION)
Keywords: Central sleep apnea, clinical guidelines, PAP, oxygen therapy, ASV
Citation: Aurora RN; Chowdhuri S; Ramar K; Bista SR; Casey KR; Lamm CI; Kristo DA; Mallea JM; Rowley JA; Zak RS; Tracy SL. The treat-
ment of central sleep apnea syndromes in adults: practice parameters with an evidence-based literature review and meta-analyses. SLEEP
2012;35(1):17-40.

Submitted for publication August, 2011

Accepted for publication August, 2011
Address correspondence to: Sherene Thomas, PhD, 2510 North Frontage
Road, Darien, IL 60561; Tel: (630) 737-9700; Fax: (630) 737-9790; E-mail:
[email protected]
SLEEP, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2012 17 CSA Practice Parameters—Aurora et al
Table of Contents
1.0 Introduction 18 4.2.2.2.1 LVEF 25
2.0 Background 18 4.2.2.2.2 AHI 25
3.0 Methods 19 4.2.2.3 BPAP-ST vs. CPAP 25
3.1 Literature search 19 4.2.3 Adaptive Servo-Ventilation (ASV) 25
3.2 Quality of evidence 19 4.2.3.1 LVEF 26
3.3 Meta-analysis 20 4.2.3.2 AHI 27
3.4 Recommendations 20 4.2.4 Oxygen 27
4.0 Treatment of Central Sleep Apnea (CSAS) 21 4.2.4.1 LVEF 27
4.1 Primary CSAS 21 4.2.4.2 AHI 27
4.2 CSAS Due to Congestive Heart Failure (CHF) Including 22 4.2.5 Direct comparison treatment studies with more than 29
Cheyne Stokes Breathing Pattern (CSBP) and Not 2 treatment modalities
Cheyne Stokes Breathing 4.2.6 Alternate therapies for CSAS related to CHF 29
4.2.1 Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) 22 4.2.7 Cardiac Interventions and CSAS 31
4.2.1.1 Transplant-Free Survival 22 4.3 CSAS Due to Medical Condition Not Cheyne Stokes: ESRD 32
4.2.1.2 LVEF 23 4.4 CSAS Due to High-Altitude Periodic Breathing 32
4.2.1.3 AHI 23 4.5 CSAS Due to Drug or Substance 33
4.2.1.4 AHI: Other analyses 23 5.0 Future Directions 33
4.2.2 Bilevel positive airway pressure (BPAP) 24 References 34
4.2.2.1 BPAP-S 24 APPENDIX S  upplemental information and data used 37
4.2.2.2 BPAP-ST 24 in meta-analyses

1.0 INTRODUCTION tilatory failure due to neuromuscular disease or chest wall dis-
The central sleep apnea syndromes (CSAS) are character- ease may manifest with central apneas or hypopneas, at sleep
ized by sleep disordered breathing associated with diminished onset or during phasic REM sleep. This is typically noted in pa-
or absent respiratory effort, coupled with the presence of symp- tients with central nervous system disease (e.g., encephalitis),
toms including excessive daytime sleepiness, frequent noctur- neuromuscular disease, or severe abnormalities in pulmonary
nal awakenings, or both. However, no recent evidence-based mechanics (e.g., kyphoscoliosis3). The ventilatory motor output
guidelines have been published. The purpose of this practice is markedly reduced and insufficient to preserve alveolar ven-
parameter is to review the available data for the treatment and tilation resulting in hypopneas. Thus, this type of central apnea
management of CSAS in adults. When possible, a relative de- may not necessarily meet the strict “central apnea” definition.
termination was made as to the most effective treatment option. CSAS due to Cheyne Stokes breathing pattern (CSBP) or
Cheyne-Stokes respiration (CSR) is characterized by an ab-
2.0 BACKGROUND sence of air flow and respiratory effort followed by hyperven-
The International Classification of Sleep Disorders (ICSD)– tilation in a crescendo-decrescendo pattern. CSR most often
22 identifies 6 different forms of CSAS: (1) Primary Central occurs in patients with congestive heart failure (CHF). The
Sleep Apnea, (2) Central Sleep Apnea Due to Cheyne Stokes prevalence is estimated to be approximately 30%4 to 40%5 in
Breathing Pattern, (3) Central Sleep Apnea Due to Medical patients with CHF. However, this respiratory pattern can also
Condition Not Cheyne Stokes, (4) Central Sleep Apnea Due to be seen in patients with stroke or renal failure.
High-Altitude Periodic Breathing, (5) Central Sleep Apnea Due There is mounting evidence that CSAS/CSR may be an indi-
to Drug or Substance, and (6) Primary Sleep Apnea of Infancy. cator of higher morbidity and mortality in CHF patients. Con-
The final category will not be reviewed in this document, as sequently, effective treatment of CSAS/CSR might improve the
these guidelines pertain to CSAS treatment in adults. outcome of CHF patients with CSAS/CSR.
While the ICSD-2 classification system for CSAS will be CSAS can occur in individuals with cardiac, renal, and neu-
used to systemize these practice parameters, it is important rological disorders but without a CSR pattern. This category
to recognize that the underlying pathophysiology of central is referred to CSAS Due to Medical Condition Not Cheyne
sleep apnea is due to 1 of 2 mechanisms: hyperventilation or Stokes.
hypoventilation. Post-hypocapnia hyperventilation is the un- CSAS associated with high altitude can be seen during the
derlying pathophysiological mechanism for central apnea as- acclimatization period, during or after rapid ascent to high
sociated with congestive heart failure, high altitude sickness, altitudes, typically 4000 meters or greater. Hyperventilation
and primary CSAS. These patients chronically hyperventilate secondary to altitude-associated hypoxia is thought to be the
in association with hypocapnia during wake and sleep and trigger for high-altitude periodic breathing. Hence, individuals
demonstrate increased chemoresponsiveness and sleep state with a heightened or brisk response to hypoxia are more likely
instability. CSAS in the absence of an identifiable etiology is to develop CSAS Due to High-Altitude Periodic Breathing.2
referred to as “primary CSAS.” The presence and prevalence of The use of chronic opioid treatment for the management of
this entity is uncertain. chronic pain has increased over the last 10 years.6 Central Sleep
Central sleep apnea due to hypoventilation results from the Apnea Due to Drug or Substance is primarily a disorder related
removal of the wakefulness stimulus to breathe in patients with to opioid use. Patients who are on long-acting opioids for at least
compromised neuromuscular ventilatory control. Chronic ven- 2 months appear to be at increased risk for developing CSAS. In
SLEEP, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2012 18 CSA Practice Parameters—Aurora et al
fact, CSAS has been reported to be present in as many as 30% of
Box 1—PICO questions
patients in methadone maintenance therapy.7 The exact mecha-
nism of opioid-related CSAS is not well elucidated. 1. What therapies improve mortality and apnea hypopnea index (AHI)
The following PICO (Patient Intervention Comparison Out- in patients with primary CSAS?
come) questions were addressed in the systematic review as 2. Does positive airway pressure (PAP, including CPAP, BPAP,
shown in Box 1. adaptive servo-ventilation [ASV]) improve clinical (transplant-free
Optimally, standards of practice should be supported by sci- survival) or surrogate (left ventricular ejection fraction [LVEF] or
entific evidence based on controlled clinical trials. However, AHI) outcomes in patients with CSAS and CHF?
the number of studies on the clinical treatment outcomes for 3. Does oxygen improve clinical (transplant-free survival) or surrogate
(LVEF or AHI) outcomes in patients with CSAS and CHF?
CSAS that meet this criterion is limited. The preponderance
4. What other therapies exist for and do they improve transplant-free
of the literature has focused on management of CSAS due to survival, LVEF, or AHI in patients with CSAS and CHF?
CSBP; therefore, caution is mandated when extrapolated to 5. What therapies exist for and do they improve AHI in patients with
other forms of central apnea. high altitude periodic breathing?
Many of the recommendations are based on studies that 6. What therapies exist for and do they improve AHI in ESRD patients
used the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) as the primary outcome with CSAS?
measure. Additional intermediate outcomes that were assessed 7. What therapies exist for and do they improve AHI in patients with
included left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) and trans- CSAS due to drug or substance?
plant-free survival in patients with CHF. Evidence from large
population-based studies has shown that AHI correlates with
survival and may be an appropriate severity metric.8-10 Neverthe- lar ejection fraction (LVEF), or apnea-hypopnea index (AHI).
less, most of the studies focused on obstructive sleep apnea and Complex sleep apnea was not included, as it is not currently
did not include a therapeutic intervention. Therefore, AHI is an listed as a disorder in the ICSD-2. Additionally, sleep dis-
acceptable surrogate outcome measure until long-term outcome ordered breathing had to be clearly differentiated between
data are available. Even more germane to the current topic is CSAS and OSA. CSAS was defined as greater than 50% cen-
a fairly recent study11 that investigated patients with systolic tral events including periodic breathing if subjects presented
heart failure and CSAS. The investigators found an AHI great- with both CSAS and OSA. Additional articles were identified
er than 5 to be predictive of mortality even after accounting by pearling (i.e., checking the reference sections of search re-
for confounders such as LVEF, NYHA functional class, heart sults for articles otherwise missed). A total of 77 articles were
rate, as well as multiple other patient factors. Hence, although reviewed, graded, and extracted.
the use of a surrogate marker such as the AHI has limitations,
there are some advantages conferred by its use as an outcome 3.2 Quality of Evidence
measure. The AHI allows for relatively easy quantification of The assessment of evidence quality was performed
disease severity, and it has been shown to correlate with other according to the GRADE process. The GRADE system differs
outcomes of interest. from other grading systems as each study is not only evaluated
for study design and risk of bias, but, additionally, an estimate
3.0 METHODS of effect (see footnote A following article) is generated for
each outcome. Multiple aspects of quality are assessed
3.1 Literature Search including study limitations, imprecision, inconsistency of
The Standards of Practice Committee of the AASM com- results, indirectness of evidence, and likeliness of publication
missioned this review in 2009. A search for articles on the bias. The quality of effects from observational studies can
medical treatment of CSAS was conducted using the PubMed be adjusted by the presence of large magnitudes of effect,
database from 1966 through June 2010. The key words for evidence of dose-response associations, and the presence
searches were: (central sleep apnea treatment), (Cheyne- of confounders.13 Quality refers to the confidence that the
Stokes treatment), [(central sleep apnea) and (heart failure) estimates of the effects are correct, and the quality rating is
and treatment], [(sleep apnea) and narcotics and treatment], applied to a body of evidence and not to individual studies.1
and [(sleep-related breathing disorders) and narcotics and Briefly, risk of bias includes aspects of study design (ran-
treatment]. The limits on these searches were humans, Eng- domized control trials [RCTs] versus non-randomized con-
lish, adults (+19 years), clinical trials, meta-analyses, and trolled trials or before-after trials)14 and conduct such as
randomized controlled trials. A second set of more specific blinding, allocation concealment, large loss to follow up, or
searches was done with the limits of humans, English, and selective outcome reporting.12 Imprecision refers to wide con-
adults (+19 years) with (central sleep apnea) and the follow- fidence intervals around the estimate of effect when there are
ing terms: 1) high altitude, 2) opioid, 3) traumatic brain injury, relatively few patients and few events. Indirectness occurs
4) [(end stage renal disease) or (renal disease) or ESRD], and when the question being addressed is different than the avail-
pharmacotherapy. A total of 252 articles were identified using able evidence regarding population, intervention, comparator,
this process. The search was updated in June 2010 to include or outcome. There is inconsistency when there is unexplained
the latest research publications. Abstracts from these articles heterogeneity of the results. Reporting bias can occur if there
were reviewed to determine if they met inclusion criteria, is selective reporting of studies or outcomes, which may occur
which were a minimum of 5 patients plus clinical outcomes if the published evidence is limited to a small number of trials
measures of mortality/transplant-free survival, left ventricu- funded by a for-profit organization.12
SLEEP, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2012 19 CSA Practice Parameters—Aurora et al
 Table 1—A summary of GRADE’s approach to rating quality of evidence1
Initial quality of a Quality of a body
Study design body of evidence Lower if Higher if of evidence
Radomized trials High → Risk of bias Large effect High (four plus: )
−1 Serious +1 Large
−2 Very serious +2 Very large
Inconsistency Dose response Moderate (three plus: )
−1 Serious +1 Evidence of a gradient
−2 Very serious
Observational Low → Indirectness All plausible residual confounding Low (two plus: )
studies −1 Serious +1 Would reduce a demonstrated
−2 Very serious effect
Imprecision Very Low (one plus: )
−1 Serious +1 Would suggest a spurious effect if
−2 Very serious no effect was observed
Publication bias
−1 Likely
−2 Very likely

Box 2—Final Assessments of Level of Bodies of Evidence1 (AHI) and the LVEF when available. All analyses are presented
using the random effects model.
High: We are very confident that the true effect lies close to that of the The result of each meta-analysis is shown in a figure with
estimate of the effect.
several components. Each study of the meta-analysis is identi-
Moderate: We are moderately confident in the effect estimate: The true fied along the left-hand column, and adjacent to it is the year
effect is likely to be close to the estimate of the effect, but there is a of the study, treatment (exposed, “e”) results, and control (“c”)
possibility that it is substantially different. results. The results are expressed as “n/M/SD” corresponding
Low: Our confidence in the effect estimate is limited: The true effect to “number/mean/standard deviation.” A graphical representa-
may be substantially different from the estimate of the effect. tion of the data is shown in the center of the figure. The verti-
Very low: We have very little confidence in the effect estimate: The true cal red line indicates the average response of all studies. The
effect is likely to be substantially different from the estimate of effect. zero line represents no effect. The width of the red diamond at
the bottom of the plot represents the standard deviation of the
meta-analysis. If the red diamond does not touch the zero line,
As a first step, all individual studies were assessed by 2 task the meta-analysis results indicate that the treatment is different
force members for study design and limitations to validity from zero (i.e., it has an effect). The magnitude of the effect
(bias) for each outcome of interest.15,16 Randomized control across all studies is given by the value of the association mea-
trials (RCTs) were considered a higher level of evidence than sure along with the 95% confidence intervals.
observational, nonrandomized, or before-after interventional Tables of the data used in the meta-analyses are presented at
studies (Table 1). Blinding for objective outcomes (mortality, the end of the manuscript in the Appendix.
AHI, if scoring was blinded) was not considered a threat to
internal validity. Subsequently, the body of evidence for each 3.4 Recommendations
outcome was assessed and graded, taking into account the The Standards of Practice Committee (SPC) of the AASM
results of the meta-analysis (if applicable) and other factors as developed and the Board of Directors of the AASM approved
described above. The final assessment, as defined in Box 2, was these practice parameters. All members of the AASM SPC
determined for each treatment and outcome measure. and Board of Directors completed detailed conflict-of-interest
The results are reported in summary tables in each section statements and were found to have no conflicts of interest
that include the number of studies, study design, limitations, in- with regard to this subject. The recommendations were also
consistency, indirectness, imprecision, and other considerations critically reviewed by 2 outside experts, and the concerns that
that went into the quality of evidence for each outcome of inter- were raised were addressed by the SPC prior to approval by
est. Also reported are the number of patients that were studied, the Board.
the overall effect that was calculated in the meta-analysis (re- These practice parameters define principles of practice that
ported as the mean difference [MD]), and a qualitative assess- should meet the needs of most patients in most situations. These
ment of the relative importance of the outcome. guidelines should not, however, be considered inclusive of all
proper methods of care or exclusive of other methods of care
3.3 Meta-Analysis reasonably directed to obtaining the same results. The ultimate
All meta-analyses were performed using MIX software.17,18 judgment regarding propriety of any specific care must be
The analyses were performed on the apnea-hypopnea index made by the physician, in light of the individual circumstances
SLEEP, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2012 20 CSA Practice Parameters—Aurora et al
 Table 2—AASM levels of recommendations
Overall quality of evidence
Final standards of practice recommendations
Assessment of benefit/harm/
High Moderate Low Very Low

Benefits clearly outweigh harm/burden Standard Standard Guideline Option

Benefits closely balanced with harm/burden

burden

OR Guideline Guideline Option Option

uncertainty in the estimates of benefit/harm/burden

Harm/burden clearly outweighs benefits Standard Standard Standard Standard

presented by the patient, available diagnostic tools, accessible dem, and triazolam. No studies were found that met inclusion
treatment options, and resources. criteria on the treatment of primary CSAS with CPAP, bilevel
The AASM expects these guidelines to have an impact on positive airway pressure in a spontaneous-timed mode (BPAP-
professional behavior, patient outcomes, and, possibly, health ST), or ASV.
care costs. These practice parameters reflect the state of knowl- In 1 non-randomized treatment study of 6 patients, Xie
edge at the time of publication and will be reviewed, updated, et al.24 reported that carbon dioxide, either administered as a
and revised as new information becomes available. Defini- gas or by the addition of dead space, significantly decreased
tions of levels of recommendations used by the AASM appear the AHI compared to room air (from 43.8 ± 17.0 to 5.9 ± 6.0).
in Table 2. Particularly noteworthy on this table is that when However, carbon dioxide is not readily available as a commer-
harm/burden clearly outweighs benefit, a STANDARD level of cial gas and can be difficult to titrate in an open circuit design.
recommendation against the proposed therapy is given regard- Therefore, carbon dioxide is not currently recommended as a
less of the overall quality of evidence. Sections titled “Values treatment option for primary CSAS.
and Trade-offs” appear under each individual practice pa- Two non-randomized treatment studies reported on the use
rameter. The Values and Trade-offs discussion elucidates the of acetazolamide for primary CSAS. One (DeBacker et al.25)
rationale leading to each recommendation. These sections are looked at low-dose (250 mg/day) acetazolamide use, while the
an integral part of the GRADE system and offer transparency other (White et al.26) employed high-dose acetazolamide (1000
to the process.19 mg/day) therapy. Low dose acetazolamide was found to sig-
nificantly decrease the AHI (from 37.2 ± 23.2 to 12.8 ± 10.8)25
4.0 TREATMENT OF CENTRAL SLEEP APNEA (CSAS) in 14 patients at 1-month follow-up. The central apnea index
As previously stated, the ICSD-22 identifies 5 central sleep significantly decreased (from 54 ± 29 to 12 ± 20) in 6 patients
apnea syndromes that can affect the adult population. These after 1 week of therapy with high-dose use.26 Additionally, an
are: (1) Primary CSAS; (2) Cheyne-Stokes breathing pattern; improvement in daytime sleepiness was reported with low-dose
(3) High-altitude periodic breathing; (4) CSAS due to medical therapy.25
condition not Cheyne Stokes; and (5) CSAS due to drug or sub- In another non-randomized treatment trial, Quadri et al.27 re-
stance. The diagnosis of Complex Sleep Apnea Syndrome, also ported that zolpidem decreased AHI from 30.0 ± 18.1 to 13.5
known as CPAP-emergent Central Sleep Apnea, is not firmly ± 13.3 (P = 0.0001) over an average of 9 weeks of treatment
established and is not a part of the ICSD-2 nosology. Complex in 20 patients. Zolpidem also decreased the central apnea hy-
Sleep Apnea Syndrome is characterized by the emergence or popnea index (CAHI) and arousals, improved sleep quality and
persistence of central respiratory events during CPAP or BPAP subjective excessive daytime sleepiness, but had mixed results
titration for treatment of OSA. Four studies were found that pro- in terms of its effect on obstructive events. In a randomized
vide limited evidence for efficacy of treatments. Two studies20,21 crossover trial with limitations, Bonnet et al.28 reported that tri-
suggest that Complex Sleep Apnea Syndrome may resolve with azolam decreased AHI (with borderline statistical significance,
continued CPAP therapy for some individuals, whereas 2 other P = 0.05) and significantly decreased the central apnea index in
studies22,23 suggest that ASV treatment may lower the AHI. The 5 patients.
available evidence was considered insufficient to warrant a
treatment recommendation. 4.1.a: Positive airway pressure therapy may be considered for
the treatment of primary CSAS. (OPTION)
4.1 Primary CSAS Values and Trade-offs: The literature on the use of PAP
Due to the infrequent occurrence of primary CSAS, there is therapy (CPAP, BPAP-ST, ASV) for the treatment of prima-
limited evidence specifically addressing therapeutic interven- ry CSAS is very limited. However, PAP therapy offers the
tions for primary CSAS. In fact, only 5 studies with a total of following benefits: (1) it has the potential to ameliorate cen-
51 participants with primary CSAS who met inclusion criteria tral respiratory events; (2) it typically does not confer sig-
were identified. These studies reported on 4 different treatments nificant risks; and (3) it is readily available in most centers.
including supplemental carbon dioxide, acetazolamide, zolpi- Therefore, PAP therapy can be considered for the treatment
SLEEP, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2012 21 CSA Practice Parameters—Aurora et al
 Table 3—Summary of quality and findings for CPAP
Quality assessment Summary of findings
No of patients Effect
No of Other Absolute
studies Design Limitations Inconsistency Indirectness Imprecision considerations CPAP Control (95% CI) Quality Importance
Transplant-free survival (follow-up mean 2 years; event rates)
329,30,33* randomized no serious no serious no serious Serious Not titrated 71 125 9-33% event rate CRITICAL
trials limitations inconsistency indirectness for suppressed MODERATE
CPAP vs. 24-56%
event rate for
controls
LVEF (follow-up 1-3 months; measured with: %; range of scores: 0-100; Better indicated by higher values)
6;30,32-34,38,39 randomized no serious no serious no serious Serious Not titrated 191 186 MD 6.4 higher IMPORTANT
143 trials; non- limitations inconsistency indirectness (2.4 to 10.5 MODERATE
randomized higher)
trial
AHI (follow-up 1-3 months; measured with: No./hr; Better indicated by lower values)
4;30,32,38,39 randomized no serious no serious no serious no serious Not titrated 139 143 MD 21 lower (25 IMPORTANT
143 trials; non- limitations inconsistency indirectness imprecision to 17 lower) MODERATE
randomized
trial
AHI (follow-up 1-84 days; measured with: No./hr; Better indicated by lower values)
830-32,37-39,42,43 Before-after very serious no serious no serious no serious Not titrated 19 0 MD 30 lower (23 IMPORTANT
trial data inconsistency indirectness imprecision to 37 lower) LOW

*2 analyses were performed on the same study data (Bradley and Arzt).

of primary CSAS. The overall very low level of quality of comes measures were compiled and reported when there was
evidence rendered an OPTION level recommendation. sufficient data: transplant-free survival, LVEF, and AHI.
It is important to note that optimizing therapy for heart failure
4.1.b: Acetazolamide has limited supporting evidence but may is central to treating CSAS. While appropriate pharmacologi-
be considered for the treatment of primary CSAS. (OPTION) cal treatment is an essential element of therapy, implementing
Values and Trade-offs: Given the low overall quality of non-pharmacological therapies such as cardiac resynchroniza-
evidence and the potential for side effects including par- tion therapy (CRT), atrial overdrive pacing (AOP), and cardiac
esthesias, tinnitus, gastrointestinal symptoms, metabolic transplant are also part of the armamentarium for CHF therapy.
acidosis, electrolyte imbalance, and drowsiness, the use of Although CSAS is not in and of itself an indication for CRT,
acetazolamide for the treatment of primary CSAS received AOP, or heart transplant, improvements in CSAS can be seen
an OPTION level recommendation. with the implementation of these interventions. As a point of
interest, available data examining the effect of these procedures
4.1.c: The use of zolpidem and triazolam may be considered for on CSAS has been included at the end of this section.
the treatment of primary CSAS only if the patient does not have
underlying risk factors for respiratory depression. (OPTION) 4.2.1 Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP)
Values and Trade-offs: Due to the limited available evi- Sixteen studies were found that addressed the effect of CPAP
dence and the significant potential for adverse side effects on CSAS associated with CHF.29-44 The studies included both
especially respiratory depression, the use of zolpidem and non-randomized treatment and randomized controlled trials.
triazolam in the setting of primary CSAS is not a preferable Treatment lengths ranged from 1 night to 2 years.
option and remains the last therapeutic option, to be consid- A key limitation observed in many of the studies was that
ered only if the other therapeutic options listed above fail. CPAP therapy was not titrated; therefore, its effectiveness was
Very close clinical follow-up must be provided to consider unclear. The overall grade for the body of evidence for trans-
the use of these hypnotic agents. plant-free survival, LVEF, and the AHI RCTs was moderate as
shown in Table 3. The low quality before-after AHI grade sum-
4.2 CSAS Due to Congestive Heart Failure (CHF) Including mary is also presented in the bottom row of the table.
Cheyne Stokes Breathing Pattern (CSBP) and Not Cheyne
Stokes Breathing 4.2.1.1 Transplant-Free Survival
Several treatment modalities, including assisted breathing Evidence assessing the outcome of CPAP therapy on trans-
devices and pharmacological therapies, have been studied to plant free survival is limited. The CANPAP trial represents the
address CSAS and CSBP in CHF patients. Continuous posi- foremost study addressing the impact of CPAP on transplant-
tive airway pressure (CPAP), other fixed pressure devices (e.g., free survival.30 While this study offered significant insight
BPAP), adaptive servo-ventilation (ASV), oxygen, and acet- regarding CPAP therapy for CSAS/CSR, some limitations
azolamide have been most extensively investigated. Three out- precluded concurrence with the investigators’ conclusion that
SLEEP, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2012 22 CSA Practice Parameters—Aurora et al
 Exposed Control Weight Association measure
Study ID Year n[e]/M[e]/SD[e] n[c]/M[c]/SD[c] (%) with 95% CI

Bradley 2005 128/2.2/5.4 130/0.4/5.3 24.80% |||||||| 1.8 (0.4942 to 3.1058)

Sin 2000 14/7.8/2.2 15/-0.5/1.5 24.73% |||||||| 8.3 (6.92 to 9.68)
Tkacova 1997 9/8/13.5 8/-0.5/8 9.51% | 8.5 (-1.9174 to 18.9174)

Studies
Granton 1996 9/8.6/15.4 8/-1.1/7.9 8.41% | 9.7 (-1.754 to 21.154)
Naughton 1995a 12/7.7/15.1 12/-0.5/8.4 10.28% |||| 8.2 (-1.5764 to 17.9764)
Naughton 1995b 9/6.5/12 9/-1/10.5 9.51% | 7.5 (-2.9174 to 17.9174)
Naughton 1994 10/4.6/7.9 4/-1.5/6.5 12.75% |||| 6.1 (-1.9343 to 14.1343)
100% ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 6.4577 (2.3979 to 10.5175)

-10 0 10 20 30
MD

Figure 1—Meta-analysis of LVEF from controlled CPAP treatment trials

Exposed Control Weight Association measure

Study ID Year n[e]/M[e]/SD[e] n[c]/M[c]/SD[c] (%) with 95% CI

Bradley 2005 97/-21.3/15.6 108/-0.2/21 77.12% |||||||||||||||||||||||||||| -21.1 (-26.1323 to -16.0677)

Granton 1996 9/-32/26 8/-16/25 3.32% | -16 (-40.2621 to 8.2621)
Studies

Naughton 1995a 12/-28.5/16.1 12/-6.1/20.8 8.82% | -22.4 (-37.2821 to -7.5179)

Naughton 1995b 9/-29.6/15.5 9/-8.7/20.9 6.76% | -20.9 (-37.8997 to -3.9003)
Naughton 1994 12/-35.3/15.5 6/-13.3/25.4 3.99% | -22 (-44.1352 to 0.1352)
100% ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| -21.0678 (-25.487 to -16.6485)

-60 -40 -20 0 20

MD
Figure 2—Meta-analysis of AHI from controlled CPAP treatment trials

CPAP is ineffective in this patient population. What can be sur- als that had control data available, including 6 RCT trials30,32-34,38,39
mised from this trial is that CPAP therapy had no direct effect and 1 non-randomized trial.43 The random-effects meta-analysis
on cardiac function or survival if sleep disordered breathing showed that CPAP increased LVEF by 6% [95% CI 2.4 to 10.5%]
was not adequately controlled. on average when compared with the control group.
Subsequently, Arzt et al.29 conducted a post hoc analysis
of the data from the above study to determine the effect of 4.2.1.3 AHI
CPAP on transplant-free survival when subjects were stratified Two meta-analyses were performed. The first (Figure 2) used
based on residual disease with CPAP therapy and found that the data from 5 trials that had control data available, including
when CSAS was adequately treated, a positive effect on both 4 RCT trials30,32,38,39 and 1 non-randomized trial.43 The random-
LVEF and transplant-free survival (event rate 9% for CSAS- effects meta-analysis showed that CPAP decreased AHI by 21/h
suppressed group versus 24% in control and 30% in non-sup- [95% CI: 17 to 25] over controls. The second meta-analysis
pressed groups) were noted. was conducted using before-after data from an additional 3 tri-
Sin et al.33 also studied transplant-free survival and LVEF in als.31,37,42 The results are shown in Figure 3 and demonstrate a
patients with CHF with and without CSR-CSAS. Through strat- decrease of 30/h [95% CI: 23 to 37] with treatment compared to
ification, significant trends towards lower mortality and cardiac baseline. Notably, residual disease, with a mean AHI of 15 ± 4,
transplantation rates were noted among the CPAP group versus remained in all the studies despite CPAP treatment.
the control group (33% event rate in the CPAP group versus
56% in the control group; relative risk reduction, 67%; 95% CI 4.2.1.4 AHI: Other analyses
−4% to 89%; P = 0.059). A post hoc analysis (Arzt et al.29) performed on the Bradley
In summary, the available data suggests that PAP may im- et al.30 data found that only some of the participants had their
prove survival if titrated to achieve a therapeutic reduction of CSAS suppressed by CPAP. Table 4 shows the results. These
AHI. Conversely, PAP therapy has no effect on survival if not data indicate that either (1) a subgroup of patients respond to
adequately treated. CPAP while others do not; or (2) adequate pressure was not
given, as participants were treated with a pressure of 10 cm H2O
4.2.1.2 LVEF or the maximum pressure tolerated.
Eleven studies investigated the effects of CPAP on LVEF. A Two more studies further expanded on the former point that
meta-analysis (Figure 1) was performed using the data from 7 tri- some patients respond to CPAP while others do not. The data in
SLEEP, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2012 23 CSA Practice Parameters—Aurora et al
 Exposed Control Weight Association measure
Study ID Year n[e]/M[e]/SD[e] n[c]/M[c]/SD[c] (%) with 95% CI

Bradley 2005 97/17.6/16.3 97/38.9/15 28.61% |||||||| -21.3 (-25.7082 to -16.8918)

Granton 1996 9/17/21 9/49/33 5.97% | -32 (-57.5548 to -6.4452)
Naughton 1995a 12/14.7/16.6 12/43.2/17 14.56% |||| -28.5 (-41.9435 to -15.0565)
Naughton 1995b 9/18.5/18 9/48.1/14.7 12.64% |||| -29.6 (-44.7831 to -14.4169)

Studies
Naughton 1994 12/18.7/17.3 12/54/14.9 15.20% |||| -35.3 (-48.2182 to -22.3818)
Yasuma 2005 5/6/7 5/34.7/21.4 8.90% | -28.7 (-48.4356 to -8.9644)
Krachman 2003 9/15/24 9/44/27 6.78% | -29 (-52.6011 to -5.3989)
Takasaki 1989 5/15/16 5/69/20 7.34% | -54 (-76.4499 to -31.5501)
100% ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| -29.7437 (-36.6575 to -22.8298)

-100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0

MD
Figure 3—Meta-analysis of AHI from before-after CPAP treatment trials

Table 4—AHI data: suppressed vs. unsuppressed

Author, Year Duration of CPAP Stratification AHI baseline (± SD) AHI after CPAP (± SD) n Titrated
Arzt, 2007 / Suppressed 33.8 ± 12.7 6.2 ± 3.9 58
3 mo. No
Ruttanaumpawan, 2009 Unsuppressed 46.9 ± 14.9 34.6 ± 12.4 39

Table 5—AHI data: CPAP responders vs. nonresponders

Author, Year Duration of CPAP Stratification AHI baseline (± SD) AHI after CPAP (± SD) n Titrated
1 night Responders 50.6 ± 8.3 7.4 ± 3.5 11
Dohi, 2008 Yes
1 night Nonresponders 54.4 ± 7.8 30.3 ± 11.7 9
1 night Responders 62 ± 29 4±2 9
Javaheri, 2000 Yes
1 night Nonresponders 62 ± 22 36 ± 15 12

Table 5 summarize the results from Dohi et al.36 and Javaheri.44 tories. BPAP effects may be specific to the mode (spontaneous
Importantly, these patients were titrated to an endpoint of elimi- [S] or spontaneous-timed [ST] mode) or to the level of pressure
nation of apneas and hypopneas. support. Thus, it is difficult to isolate the independent effect of
BPAP on central apnea.
4.2.1.a CPAP therapy targeted to normalize the apnea hypopnea
index (AHI) is indicated for the initial treatment of CSAS related 4.2.2.1 BPAP-S
to CHF. (STANDARD) There was 1 study that met inclusion criteria for BPAP-S.45
Values and Trade-offs: The overall quality of evidence for This was a small RCT of 10 patients on BPAP-S with standard
the use of CPAP in the setting of CSAS related to CHF is medical therapy vs. 11 patients on standard medical therapy
moderate, but with a large effect size and consistent find- alone. The change in LVEF from baseline at 3 months was
ings for reduction of AHI and improvement in LVEF. Post reported to be +20.3% ± 8.2% with BPAP-S versus +3.2% ±
hoc analysis of the CANPAP data indicates that CPAP treat- 10.1% with standard medical therapy alone. The 1 night change
ment targeted to an AHI < 15 has a positive effect on trans- in AHI was 28.3 ± 12.3/h at baseline to 5.2 ± 3.8 after BPAP-S.
plant-free survival in patients with CSAS and CHF. Given The patients were followed for a mean of 31.0 ± 2.3 months,
the relative ease of availability of this therapeutic interven- and BPAP-S appeared to improve survival (10/10 patients using
tion and overall familiarity with its use, a STANDARD level BPAP-S versus 7/11 controls survived); however, survival was
of recommendation was given. An alternate treatment op- not a stipulated outcome. BPAP in the spontaneous mode may
tion should be considered in the absence of adequate control aggravate central apnea caused by hyperventilation. Further in-
of CSAS related to CHF with CPAP. vestigations are necessary to more definitively characterize the
association between BPAP-S and the outcomes of interest.
4.2.2 Bilevel positive airway pressure (BPAP)
BPAP may be used in patients who require high PAP level 4.2.2.2 BPAP-ST
or as a pressure-support ventilatory method to augment alveo- Four studies36,46-48 investigating the effect of BPAP-ST on
lar ventilation. In fact, BPAP, in the spontaneous mode, may CSAS related to CHF were found. The studies included non-
precipitate periodic breathing and central apnea and has been randomized treatment trials as well as randomized controlled
used experimentally for this purpose in sleep research labora- trials. Out of the 4 studies, 1 study evaluated the effect of BPAP-
SLEEP, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2012 24 CSA Practice Parameters—Aurora et al
 Table 6—Summary of quality and findings for BPAP-ST
Quality assessment Summary of findings
No of patients Effect
No of Other
studies Design Limitations Inconsistency Indirectness Imprecision considerations BPAP-ST control Absolute Quality Importance
LVEF (follow-up mean 3-6 months; Better indicated by higher values)
236,46 Non- serious no serious no serious serious small sample size 14 14* See text IMPORTANT
randomized inconsistency indirectness VERY LOW
AHI (follow-up 1 night; Better indicated by lower values)
336,46,47 Non- serious no serious no serious serious short-term 25 25** MD 44 lower (40 IMPORTANT
randomized inconsistency indirectness to 49 lower) VERY LOW

*Patients served as their own controls in 1 of the studies. **Control data are baseline values.

Exposed Control Weight Association measure

Study ID Year n[e]/M[e]/SD[e] n[c]/M[c]/SD[c] (%) with 95% CI

Dohi 2008 9/8.4/4.7 9/54.4/7.8 Studies 54.00% |||||||||||||||||||| -46 (-51.95 to -40.05)
Kasai 2005 7/10/8 7/49.4/16.1 11.00% |||| -39.4 (-52.72 to -26.08)
Willson 2001 9/6/5 9/49/10 36.00% |||||||||||| -43 (-50.3 to -35.7)

100% ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| -44.22 (-48.58 to -39.87)

-60 -40 -20 0

MD
Figure 4—Meta-analysis of AHI from before-after 1-night BPAP-ST treatment trials

ST on CPAP non-responders, as defined by the persistence of ± 10.7 to 7.7 ± 5.6 with CPAP and 6.5 ± 6.6 with BPAP-ST)
central sleep apnea on CPAP (AHI ≥ 15).36 One study48 was not and NYHA class.
included in the analysis because it used a volume preset ventila-
tor as opposed to BPAP-ST. The compiled grades for LVEF and 4.2.2.a BPAP therapy in a spontaneous timed (ST) mode targeted to
AHI are very low as detailed in Table 6. normalize the apnea hypopnea index (AHI) may be considered for
the treatment of CSAS related to CHF only if there is no response to
4.2.2.2.1 LVEF adequate trials of CPAP, ASV, and oxygen therapies. (OPTION)
Two studies36,46 reported the effects of BPAP-ST on LVEF. Values and Trade-offs: There were a limited number of
Dohi et al.36 reported the change in LVEF versus baseline on 7 studies that examined the effectiveness of BPAP in the treat-
patients after 6 months of treatment as +12.7% ± 10.0%. Kasai ment of CSAS/CSR. ST mode was used more frequently com-
et al.46 reported in a non-randomized trial that the LVEF of the pared with spontaneous mode in the available studies. The
group of 7 patients receiving BPAP-ST improved 9.9% ± 8.6% level of evidence for BPAP with spontaneous mode is com-
over baseline versus the control group, in which the LVEF de- prised only of 1 trial that met inclusion criteria. Therefore,
creased by 1.4% ± 8.5%. no recommendation can be made for this mode of BPAP until
further evidence is available. BPAP-ST therapy offers many
4.2.2.2.2 AHI of the same advantages as CPAP therapy, such as low risk and
There were 3 studies that directly studied the effect of easy availability. BPAP-ST may be considered only in those
BPAP-ST on AHI. None of the trials had a control arm. The who fail CPAP, ASV, and oxygen therapy, as these latter op-
meta-analysis indicated an average decrease in the AHI by 44 tions have substantially more evidence supporting their use.
[95% CI −40 to −49] with treatment versus baseline as shown BPAP-ST is a form of noninvasive ventilation that requires
in Figure 4. All studies showed that the fixed pressure devices specialized expertise. The cost is approximately $1900 com-
decreased the average AHI to less than or equal to 10. pared with $400-$1000 for CPAP.50 The paucity of data al-
lows only an OPTION level of recommendation at this time.
4.2.2.3 BPAP-ST vs. CPAP
BPAP-ST was directly compared to CPAP in a 14-day ran- 4.2.3 Adaptive Servo-Ventilation (ASV)
domized crossover trial by Köhnlein et al.49 Sixteen patients Adaptive servo-ventilation (ASV) is a form of closed-loop
had CHF with a NYHA Class of 2.8 ± 0.4 and LVEF of 24 ± mechanical ventilation, pressure preset, and volume or flow
7. Patients were not titrated. After PAP therapy was initiated, cycled. It can be delivered at default settings or with variable
the NYHA Class improved to 2.0 ± 0.4 for CPAP users and to inspiratory and expiratory pressure (to ensure upper airway pa-
1.9 ± 0.5 for BPAP users. Overall, CPAP and BPAP-ST were tency). ASV alleviates central sleep apnea due to CSBP by pro-
equally effective in lowering the AHI (from a baseline of 26.7 viding dynamic (breath-by-breath) adjustment of inspiratory
SLEEP, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2012 25 CSA Practice Parameters—Aurora et al
 Table 7—Summary of quality and findings for ASV
Quality assessment Summary of findings
Effect
No of Other No of
studies Design Limitations Inconsistency Indirectness Imprecision considerations patients Absolute Quality Importance
LVEF (follow-up 0.5-6 months; measured with: %; Better indicated by higher values)
6 4 randomized51,54,60,61 2 RCTs-no no serious no serious no serious Generally funded by 951 MD 6.1 higher IMPORTANT
and 2 non- limitations; 2 inconsistency indirectness imprecision manufacturers (3.9 to 8.4 MODERATE
randomized trials RCTs – limitations;
52,57
higher)
2 NRTs – no other
limitations
AHI (follow-up 0.005 - 6 months; measured with: No./hr sleep; Better indicated by lower values)
9 6 randomized51,53-55,60,61 2 RCTs – no no serious no serious no serious Generally funded by 1271 MD 30.8 lower IMPORTANT
and 3 non- limitations; 4 inconsistency indirectness imprecision manufacturers (36.4 to 25.3 MODERATE
randomized 52,56,57
RCTs – limitations lower)
trials / 1 night of study /
small n; 2 NRTs no
other limitations; 1
NRT – only 1 night

1
Results vs. baseline, patients served as their own controls.

Exposed Control Weight Association measure

Study ID Year n[e]/M[e]/SD[e] n[c]/M[c]/SD[c] (%) with 95% CI

Kasai 2010 15/45.5/11.9 15/36.4/13 6.00% | 9.1 (0.18 to 18.02)

Oldenburg 2008 29/35.2/11 29/28.2/7 22.00% |||||||| 7 (2.25 to 11.75)
Fietze 2008 15/26.5/8.8 15/24.6/7.9 14.00% |||| 1.9 (-4.08 to 7.88)
Studies

Zhang 2006 14/37.2/4.1 14/30.2/4.6 47.00% |||||||||||||||| 7 (3.77 to 10.23)

Philippe 2006 7/36.9/9 7/29/9 5.00% | 7.9 (-1.53 to 17.33)
Pepperell 2003 15/38.3/12.8 15/36.5/11.5 6.00% | 1.8 (-6.91 to 10.51)

100% ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 6.15 (3.94 to 8.36)

-10 0 10 20
MD
Figure 5—Meta-analysis of LVEF from before-after ASV treatment trials

pressure support with a back-up rate to normalize breathing 3 studies45-47 compared ASV to CPAP, 2 studies54,55 compared it
patterns relative to a predetermined target. Specifically, ASV to BPAP-ST, 1 study56 compared ASV to either CPAP or BPAP
mitigates hyperventilation and associated hypocapnia by deliv- (these 2 treatment results were combined), and 1 study com-
ering preset minute ventilation. pared ASV to oxygen.57
The ResMed ASV (AutoSet CS, AutoSet CS2, VPAP Adapt, In summary, the data for LVEF and AHI are moderate as
or VPAP AdaptSV) provides EEP that can be adjusted to stabilize shown in Table 7. Meta-analyses indicate that ASV improves
the upper airway obstruction. These devices target 90% of the LVEF by 6% [95% CI 4%-8%] higher and decreases the AHI
calculated ventilatory assistance over a 3-minute moving win- by 31 [95% CI −25 to −36] over baseline, and by 12-23/h
dow, to minimize hypo- and hyperventilation. ResMed ASV ini- compared with CPAP. Furthermore, it is worth noting 2 more
tially provides pressure support that varies between 3 and 15 cm recent studies58,59 (which were not included in this analysis as
H2O, and if not sufficient to maintain 90% of the calculated ven- they fell outside the defined search dates) both confirmed sig-
tilatory assistance, it then increases the back-up respiratory rate. nificant improvements in AHI and LVEF with ASV treatment
The Respironics ASV (BiPAP autoSV or HEART PAP) tar- that were consistent with the analyzed data. Kasai et al.60 notes
gets the average peak flow, which is calculated over a 4-minute that although CPAP can suppress CSAS (e.g., 1-night data),
moving window. Similar to ResMed ASV, the EPAP in BiPAP compliance can be an issue limiting its effectiveness over time.
autoSV serves to stabilize upper airway obstruction, while the They report that compliance was significantly better with ASV
IPAP max increases when the flow signal is below the target than with CPAP (5.2 ± 0.9 with ASV vs. 4.4 ± 1.1 h/night with
peak flow. If the flow target is reached, the device does not offer CPAP). There are no long-term outcome data.
any additional pressure support or a minimum level of support
if the IPAP min is set slightly above EPAP. Similar to Resmed 4.2.3.1 LVEF
ASV, the Respironics ASV has a back-up rate that can be set in Six studies51,52,54,57,60,61 reported on the effects of ASV on
auto mode or manually adjusted. LVEF. The meta-analysis of the change in LVEF with treat-
One study51 compared therapeutic to subtherapeutic ASV, 2 ment versus baseline is shown in Figure 5. The data show that
non-randomized trials52,53 compared ASV treatment to baseline, ASV improves LVEF by 6.2% (95% CI 3.9% to 8.4%). Two
SLEEP, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2012 26 CSA Practice Parameters—Aurora et al
 Exposed Control Weight Association measure
Study ID Year n[e]/M[e]/SD[e] n[c]/M[c]/SD[c] (%) with 95% CI

Kasai 2010 15/1.9/2.1 15/37.4/19.5 11.00% |||| -35.5 (-45.43 to -25.57)

Arzt 2008 14/4/3.7 14/46.4/15 12.00% |||| -42.4 (-50.49 to -34.31)
Fietze 2008 15/11.1/9.9 15/31/10 13.00% |||| -19.9 (-27.02 to -12.78)
Oldenburg 2008 29/3.8/4.1 29/37.4/9.4 15.00% |||| -33.6 (-37.33 to -29.87)

Studies
Morgenthaler 2007 6/0/0 6/46/22.7 6.00% | -46 (-64.16 to -27.84)
Philippe 2006 9/3/4 9/47/18 9.00% | -44 (-56.05 to -31.95)
Szollosi 2006 10/14/12 10/30/20.9 7.00% | -16 (-30.94 to -1.06)
Zhang 2006 14/6.5/0.8 14/34.5/6.1 15.00% |||| -28 (-31.22 to -24.78)
Pepperell 2003 15/5.4/7.4 15/24.7/11.3 13.00% |||| -19.3 (-26.14 to -12.46)
100% ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| -30.82 (-36.36 to -25.28)

-80 -60 -40 -20 0

MD
Figure 6—Meta-analysis of AHI from before-after ASV treatment trials

longer-term (3-6 months) studies by Philippe et al.61 and Kasai 4.2.4 Oxygen
et al.60 showed a statistically significant increase in LVEF with Oxygen has been used as a therapeutic intervention in pa-
ASV, whereas CPAP did not. Though the study by Fietze et al. tients with central sleep apnea secondary to heart failure. The
showed no effect of ASV on LVEF, BPAP-ST statistically sig- mechanisms underlying the effect of oxygen on ventilatory
nificantly increased LVEF.54 control during sleep remain elusive. Potential mechanisms in-
clude reduced CO2 chemoreflex sensitivity or increased cere-
4.2.3.2 AHI bral PCO2 level.63 Specifically, hyperoxia exposure can result
Nine studies51-57,60,61 reported data on the effects of ASV on in reduced controller gain due to inhibition of peripheral che-
AHI and were consistent in showing that ASV improves AHI mosensitivity.64 Several studies have reported on the effects of
over baseline. Meta-analyses indicate that ASV decreases oxygen supplementation on the AHI and cardiac LVEF. In these
AHI by 31/h [95% CI −25 to −36] over baseline as shown in studies, patients had systolic heart failure with NYHA class II
Figure 6. Furthermore, 6 of the studies51,52,55,56,60,61 showed a nor- to IV functional status52-60 and were receiving65-69 “optimal”
malization of AHI to 5 or less. pharmacotherapy for CHF. The duration of therapy with oxy-
Four studies report that ASV decreases AHI by 12-23 com- gen varied from a single night to 12 months. The summary of
pared to CPAP treatment.55,56,60,61 Two studies showed equivalence the grades and treatment effects are shown in Table 8.
between ASV and BPAP-ST.54,55 One study57 compared ASV to
oxygen and found that ASV decreased the AHI by 21 events/h 4.2.4.1 LVEF
compared to oxygen (a decrease of 81% vs. 19%, respectively). Although none of the studies reported on mortality/transplant-
free survival, 1 study70 reported no difference in the cumulative
4.2.3a Adaptive Servo-Ventilation (ASV) targeted to normalize incidence rate of cardiac events between the oxygen therapy and
the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) is indicated for the treatment of control groups (hazard ratio for cardiac events 0.78; 95% CI,
CSAS related to CHF. (STANDARD) 0.30-2.05; P = 0.619 [log-rank test]). Six studies57,65,69-71,74 re-
Values and Tradeoff: The overall quality of evidence for ported changes in LVEF following treatment with oxygen. The
ASV is moderate. While there is no survival or long-term data consistently showed an improvement in LVEF with oxygen
data available for ASV at this time, there is a sufficient treatment. The 3 longest-term trials (3-12 months in duration, 2
amount of data consistently demonstrating improvement RCTs and 1 non-randomized trial) were used in the meta-anal-
in both the AHI and LVEF. Additionally, there was a study ysis. Figure 7 shows the results of the meta-analysis, indicating
suggesting overall better compliance with ASV compared an average improvement in LVEF of 5% (95% CI 0.3 to 9.8).
with CPAP. It is worth noting that most of the available The analysis included only the before and after data since the tri-
studies are industry sponsored, and different manufactur- als comprised 2 trial designs. The control data from the 2 RCTs
ers utilize different algorithms to detect respiratory events showed approximately a 1% improvement in LVEF.
and determine characteristics of pressure delivery. There-
fore, generalizability is not possible or appropriate. There 4.2.4.2 AHI
is also some uncertainty as to what are the optimum set- The studies reporting on the effect of oxygen on AHI fell
tings, reflecting an overall lack of experience with using into 2 groups: those that were randomized with control groups
these devices.62 It should be mentioned that the cost of these (RCT)65,67,69,70 and those that were either non-randomized be-
devices50 is several-fold greater than the cost of CPAP, and fore-after trials,57,71-74 or randomized for treatment but with-
availability is not universal. Nonetheless, the data for ASV out baseline measurements.66,68 All except 1 study75 reported
is consistent and is at least comparable if not better than the a statistically significant decrease in AHI with oxygen supple-
data supporting CPAP use. mentation. Javaheri et al.73 further reported that there were re-
SLEEP, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2012 27 CSA Practice Parameters—Aurora et al
 Table 8—Summary of quality and findings for oxygen
Quality assessment Summary of findings
No of patients Effect
No of Other
studies Design Limitations Inconsistency Indirectness Imprecision considerations oxygen control Absolute Quality Importance
LVEF (follow-up 3-12 months; measured with: %; Better indicated by lower values)
3 2 randomized69,70 2 RCTs – no no serious no serious no serious underpowered 491 49 MD 5.0 IMPORTANT
and 1 non- limitations; 1 inconsistency indirectness imprecision higher (0.3 to MODERATE
randomized71 NRT – no other 9.8 higher)
trials limitations
AHI (follow-up 1-12 months; measured with: No./hr; Better indicated by lower values)
3 randomized no serious no serious no serious no serious Some issues with 42 42 MD 15 lower IMPORTANT
trials67,69,70 limitations inconsistency indirectness imprecision power (7 to 23 MODERATE
lower)
AHI (follow-up 1-120 nights; measured with: No/hr; Better indicated by lower values)
7 5 before/ 3 NRTs - no serious no serious no serious none 129 02 MD 18 lower IMPORTANT
after57,71-74 and no other inconsistency indirectness imprecision (10 to 26 MODERATE
2 randomized limitations; lower)
crossover66,68 2 NRTs
without baseline -underpowered;
data 2 NRTs- short
term (1 night to
1 week)

1
Another 24 patients were tested in the shorter-term trials (patients were their own controls). 2Patients served as their own controls; another 9 patients were
tested in Brostrom that were not included because the data were not normally distributed.

Exposed Control Weight Association measure

Study ID Year n[e]/M[e]/SD[e] n[c]/M[c]/SD[c] (%) with 95% CI

Toyama 2009 10/37/10 10/27/9 31.36% |||||||||||| 10 (1.6615 to 18.3385)

Studies

Sasayama 2009 21/38.2/13.6 21/34.7/10.4 40.20% |||||||||||||||| 3.5 (-3.8225 to 10.8225)

Shigemitsu 2007 18/46.4/14.8 18/44.7/11.9 28.44% |||||||| 1.7 (-7.0731 to 10.4731)
100% ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 5.0266 (0.2628 to 9.7904)

-10 0 10 20
MD
Figure 7—Meta-analysis of LVEF from controlled oxygen treatment trials

sponders (n = 14, AHI < 15/h) and partial responders (n = 22) change in QOL,75 improvement (decrease) in serum BNP levels,71
to oxygen therapy. The responders had a lower initial AHI and and a significant improvement in functional exercise capacity,67,75
higher PaCO2. although without significant improvement in LVEF in all cases.75
Meta-analyses on these 2 groups were performed separately. It is noteworthy that no adverse events were reported with pro-
One study was excluded from analysis because the data were longed oxygen supplementation in these studies.
non-normally distributed.75 The meta-analyses provided similar In addition to the studies above, 2 studies directly compared
results as shown in Figures 8 and 9. The RCT analysis showed oxygen to CPAP. In-laboratory titration was not performed in
an average AHI decrease of 15 [95% CI: −7 to −23] per hour either study. Arzt et al.76 reported that both supplemental oxy-
with oxygen treatment over the control group. The meta-analy- gen and CPAP reduced AHI, but only CPAP improved the ap-
sis of the before-after studies and studies with no baseline mea- nea index to a statistically significant degree. It was not clear
surements showed an average AHI decrease of 18 [95% CI: −10 whether the apnea index was composed of central, obstructive,
to −26] per hour from baseline after oxygen treatment. or both types of respiratory events. Furthermore, CPAP, not
Other germane findings from these studies include: a reduction oxygen, significantly improved LVEF and ventilatory efficien-
in sympathetic nerve activity69 but with no demonstrable effect on cy (V˙E/V˙CO2-slope) during exercise and exercise capacity
cognitive function, patient symptoms (as measured by Epworth (peakV˙O2). In a second study of patients with severe CHF,
Sleepiness Scale or Visual Analogue Scale), or statistically signifi- Krachman et al.77 reported that both treatments significantly
cant improvements in sleep (decreased stage 1 sleep and arous- reduced AHI, with no difference between 2 treatment groups.
als with increased stage 2 and slow wave sleep)66,67,72; however, Oxygen and CPAP were equally effective in improving mean
daytime symptoms did not improve significantly.68 In a separate oxygen saturation and decreasing mean percent time with oxy-
study,73 sleep parameters did not differ with the use of oxygen gen saturation < 90%, but total sleep time and sleep efficiency
therapy for the group in total, but they did for “responders” who decreased with CPAP therapy, while the arousal index was
exhibited increased sleep efficiency and a decreased number of unchanged with both supplemental oxygen therapy and CPAP
arousals. Other reported results include improvement65,70 or no therapy. The data are presented in the Appendix.
SLEEP, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2012 28 CSA Practice Parameters—Aurora et al
 Exposed Control Weight Association measure
Study ID Year n[e]/M[e]/SD[e] n[c]/M[c]/SD[c] (%) with 95% CI

Toyama 2009 10/-21/6.5 10/1.1/11.9 34.05% |||||||||||| -22.1 (-30.5041 to -13.6959)

Studies
Sasayama 2009 21/-10/10.3 21/0.07/12.2 39.50% |||||||||||| -10.07 (-16.8989 to -3.2411)
Staniforth 1998 11/-12.9/12 11/0.2/14.2 26.44% |||||||| -13.1 (-24.0866 to -2.1134)
100% ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| -14.968 (-22.6663 to -7.2697)

-40 -30 -20 -10 0

MD

Figure 8—Meta-analysis of AHI from RCT oxygen treatment trials

Exposed Control Weight Association measure

Study ID Year n[e]/M[e]/SD[e] n[c]/M[c]/SD[c] (%) with 95% CI

Shigemitsu 2007 18/6.2/3.2 18/33.7/11.1 18.11% |||| -27.5 (-32.8367 to -22.1633)

Krachman 2006 10/12/17 10/57/61 3.38% | -45 (-84.2482 to -5.7518)
Zhang 2006 14/27.8/8.2 14/34.5/6.1 18.10% |||| -6.7 (-12.0535 to -1.3465)
Studies

Javaheri 1999 36/29/29 36/49/19 14.07% |||| -20 (-31.3253 to -8.6747)

Franklin 1997 20/8.7/9.1 20/31.3/13.3 17.06% |||| -22.6 (-29.6627 to -15.5373)
Andreas 1996 22/10/9 22/26/24 14.51% |||| -16 (-26.7107 to -5.2893)
Hanly 1989 9/18.9/7.2 9/30/14.1 14.77% |||| -11.1 (-21.4433 to -0.7567)
100% ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| -18.3441 (-26.2685 to -10.4198)

-100 -80 -60 -40 -20 0

MD

Figure 9—Meta-analysis of AHI from before-after oxygen treatment trials

4.2.4. Nocturnal oxygen therapy is indicated for the treatment of oxygen, and high-frequency jet ventilation; Teschler et al.79
CSAS related to CHF. (STANDARD) evaluated the effectiveness of CPAP, BPAP-ST, oxygen, and
Values and Trade-offs: Based on above data, the benefits of ASV; and in a retrospective review, Allam et al.23 reported on
oxygen supplementation for the treatment of CSAS are abun- the effects of ASV, CPAP (although all the patients were selected
dant and outweigh any potential disadvantages. While the to have suboptimal response to CPAP), BPAP-ST, and ASV in
variable duration of treatment in each study limits recommen- patients with CSAS and CSAS/CSR. Allam’s study also includ-
dations in regard to duration of oxygen therapy, the overall ed patients without CHF (68% of CSAS patients and 40% of
positive direction of results with respect to reducing AHI and CSAS/CSR patients) and those on opioids (23% of those with
improving LVEF confirms our recommendation. Although 1 CSAS). In Hu’s78 study, all treatment modalities improved AHI
paper reported that the cumulative incidence rate of cardiac to a statistically significant extent; however, residual disease
events was no different between oxygen therapy and control persisted, as shown in the table. Comparing all treatment mo-
groups, its effect on transplant free survival has not been as- dalities, only BPAP was statistically significantly better than the
sessed. The universal availability of oxygen therapy coupled other treatment modalities in reducing the AHI. Teschler et al.79
with the overall quality of evidence discussed above influenced reported that all treatment devices (oxygen, CPAP, BPAP, and
the level of recommendation. It should be noted that while oxy- ASV) significantly reduced AHI compared to baseline. Fur-
gen therapy does not confer outcome advantages over CPAP thermore, ASV was significantly superior to all other treatment
therapy in the available evidence, supplemental oxygen can be devices. Additional analysis showed that BPAP also was signifi-
easily administered and can be given for those individuals with cantly better than CPAP (P = 0.027). Allam et al.23 reported that
CSAS related to CHF who are unable to comply with CPAP ASV performed almost equivalently to BPAP-ST for patients
therapy. Consideration should be given to a repeat sleep study with CSAS and equivalent to CPAP (and better than BPAP-ST)
with oxygen to ensure adequate resolution of central sleep ap- for patients with CSAS/CSR. The data are presented in Table 9.
nea events. In the US, the current cost of supplemental oxygen
therapy is approximately $200 per month. 4.2.6 Alternate therapies for CSAS related to CHF
Several alternate therapies have been examined for the treat-
4.2.5 Direct comparison treatment studies with more than 2 ment of CSAS/CSR associated with CHF. These include phar-
treatment modalities macological agents such as acetazolamide,80 theophylline,81,82
Three studies directly compared more than 2 treatment mo- carvedilol,83,84 and captopril.85 Additionally, one study evalu-
dalities: Hu et al.78 evaluated the effectiveness of CPAP, BPAP, ated the use of erythropoietin and intravenous iron in patients
SLEEP, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2012 29 CSA Practice Parameters—Aurora et al
 Table 9—AHI data for head-to-head studies comparing more than 2 treatment modalities
AHI after Test*
AHI baseline Treatment AHI CPAP AHI BPAP AHI oxygen
Author, Year Duration of Trial (± SD) (± SD) (± SD) (± SD) (± SD)
Hu, 2006 1 night 30.9 ± 8.3 20.1 ± 4.1 18.5 ± 5.0 14.3 ± 3.9 23.6 ± 6.6
Teschler, 2001 1 night 44.5 ± 12.7 6.3 ± 3.4 26.8 ± 17.2 14.8 ± 8.6 28.2 ± 12.7
Allam, 2006**: CSAS 1 night 60 (40.5–72.5) 7 (4–11) 68.5 (34.3–77.8) 11 (5.5–61) N/A
Allam, 2006**: CSAS/CSR 1 night 50 (38–69) 4 (0–14) 12 (4.5–35.3) 26 (19–49) N/A

*Test treatment for Hu was high-frequency jet ventilation, and for Teschler and Allam it was ASV. **Data reported as median with interquartile range

with CHF and anemia.86 Lastly, the use of carbon dioxide has statistically significantly improved when anemia was corrected
also been examined.87,88 The detailed results are presented in with erythropoietin and intravenous iron. The decrease in AHI
the Appendix. correlated with an increase in hemoglobin levels. In all 38 par-
In a randomized crossover study, Javaheri80 showed statisti- ticipants (of whom one had no sleep disordered breathing and
cally significant improvement in both objective (AHI) and sub- 2 had OSA), statistically significant improvements were seen
jective measures (patient-reported sleep quality and daytime in the ESS, NYHA class (2.9 ± 9.4 to 1.7 ± 0.7), and daytime
fatigue) with acetazolamide. However, no statistically signifi- sleepiness as measured by a visual analog scale. However, giv-
cant improvement in LVEF was observed in this study. en the low overall level of evidence coupled with the potential
There were 2 studies looking at the use of theophylline for side effects, no recommendation could be made regarding the
the treatment of CHF related CSAS: 1 randomized crossover use of erythropoietin and intravenous iron.
(Javaheri et al.81) and 1 non-randomized treatment trial (Hu In addition to the pharmacological therapies, 2 studies report-
et al.82). Both studies demonstrated statistically significant de- ed on the effect of carbon dioxide on AHI and sleep. In a ran-
clines in the AHI, and 1 study82 showed a statistically signifi- domized crossover study, Andreas et al.87 reported that 1 night of
cant decrease in EEG arousals with theophylline use. However, supplemental oxygen at 2 liters per minute (LPM) admixed with
no statistically significant changes in sleep architecture,82 sleep carbon dioxide at 0.2–1 LPM significantly decreased AHI (from
efficiency,82 or LVEF81 were observed. 36.7 ± 21.9 in air to 5.4 ± 3.6 with oxygen and CO2) and dura-
In 2 well-conducted but preliminary studies,83,84 Tamura et al. tion of CSR compared to room air in 9 patients. CSR with ap-
reported statistically significant improvements in both LVEF neas were noted in only 2 patients receiving oxygen plus carbon
(32% ± 7.4% to 45% ± 9.8%, P < 0.001) and AHI (34 ± 13 to 14 dioxide compared to 8 patients receiving room air. However,
± 13, P = 0.003) with 10-20 mg/d of the β-blocker carvedilol. sleep architecture did not improve, arousals were not reduced,
However, the mechanisms through which the improvement in and there was evidence of increased sympathetic activation with
the CAI is effected are not clearly delineated. While there is the admixture of oxygen and carbon dioxide. This study did
some evidence that β-blockers decrease central chemosensitiv- not measure the effect of oxygen alone. Steens et al.88 reported
ity, it is likely that improvement in LVEF plays a key role in the that 3% carbon dioxide, compared to room air, eliminated CSR/
concomitant decline seen in central respiratory events. CSAS in patients with severe CHF, reducing AHI from 41.1 ±
In a non-randomized treatment trial with limitations, Walsh 28.9 to 1.0 ± 1.7 in the 6 patients. The central apnea index was
et al.85 showed a statistically significant decrease in AHI with not provided in either of these studies. In total, only 15 patients
captopril in participants with mild to moderate CHF. An in- were studied for 1 night each. As previously mentioned, carbon
crease in slow wave sleep and REM sleep times, subjective dioxide is not universally available and is difficult to administer.
sleep quality, and daytime energy levels were noted. End-tidal Carbon dioxide is not a recommended treatment option.
CO2 concentrations and daytime minute ventilation were re-
duced. No significant changes in cardiac output and oxygen 4.2.6.a The following therapies have limited supporting evidence
uptake were observed. However, it is well established that ACE but may be considered for the treatment of CSAS related to CHF,
inhibitors help enhance cardiac function in the setting of CHF, after optimization of standard medical therapy, if PAP therapy
and this may contribute to the reduction in CSAS seen in this is not tolerated, and if accompanied by close clinical follow-up:
particular study. acetazolamide and theophylline. (OPTION)
Overall, the use of β-blockers and ACE inhibitors has be- Values and Trade-offs: There is only 1 study for acetazol-
come part of the standard regimen for the treatment of CHF. amide and 2 studies for theophylline. Therefore the data
So, while the 3 studies discussed above provided data showing for each agent are very low. Furthermore, the benefits vs.
improvement in central respiratory events with the use of these harms are unclear. Side effects of acetazolamide have been
medications, it remains difficult to confidently state that these previously outlined. Theophylline is also associated with a
agents independently treat CSAS that is associated with CHF. number of potential adverse effects such as cardiac arrhyth-
This further highlights that optimization of CHF therapy in this mias, CNS excitability, and gastrointestinal symptoms. Ad-
setting is essential. ditionally, it has a narrow therapeutic index, and therefore
In a non-randomized treatment trial consisting of participants close monitoring of levels is important. These pharmaco-
with CHF and anemia, Zilberman et al.86 reported that the AHI logical therapies require further research to generate more
SLEEP, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2012 30 CSA Practice Parameters—Aurora et al
 Table 10—Summary of quality and findings for CRT
Quality assessment Summary of findings
No of patients Effect
No of Other
studies Design Limitations Inconsistency Indirectness Imprecision considerations CRT control Absolute Quality Importance
LVEF (follow-up 3-6 months; measured with: %; Better indicated by higher values)
6 Non-randomized serious no serious no serious no serious None 111 1111 MD 8.2 IMPORTANT
treatment trials inconsistency indirectness imprecision higher (4.9 to MODERATE
11.5 higher)
AHI (follow-up 0.005-6 months; measured with: No./hr sleep; Better indicated by lower values)
7 Non-randomized serious no serious no serious no serious none 123 1231 MD 11.8 IMPORTANT
treatment trials inconsistency indirectness imprecision lower (9.1 to MODERATE
14.4 lower)

1
Patients served as their own controls (post-CRT or pre-CRT).

Exposed Control Weight Association measure

Study ID Year n[e]/M[e]/SD[e] n[c]/M[c]/SD[c] (%) with 95% CI

Luthje 2009 18/28.4/7.7 18/20.7/4.6 18.30% |||| 7.7 (3.5564 to 11.8436)

Oldenburg 2007 36/29.1/7.3 36/25.2/6.1 20.88% |||||||| 3.9 (0.7924 to 7.0076)
Yiu 2008 15/38.1/8.9 15/28.8/9.7 12.65% |||| 9.3 (2.638 to 15.962)
Studies

Sinha 2004 14/35/9 14/25/5 15.31% |||| 10 (4.6069 to 15.3931)

Gabor 2005 10/24.2/7.8 10/19/4.2 15.09% |||| 5.2 (-0.2907 to 10.6907)
Skobel 2005 18/33/8 18/19/5 17.77% |||| 14 (9.6418 to 18.3582)
100% ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| 8.2033 (4.8662 to 11.5404)

-5 0 5 10 15 20
MD

Figure 10—Meta-analysis of LVEF from CRT treatment trials

Exposed Control Weight Association measure

Study ID Year n[e]/M[e]/SD[e] n[c]/M[c]/SD[c] (%) with 95% CI

Oldenburg 2007 36/17.3/13.7 36/31.2/15.5 11.42% |||| -13.9 (-20.6575 to -7.1425)

Kara 2008 12/8.1/5.2 12/14.3/10 12.41% |||| -6.2 (-12.5772 to 0.1772)
Luthje 2009 18/25.7/17.5 18/37.1/13.4 5.93% | -11.4 (-21.5823 to -1.2177)
Studies

Sinha 2004 14/4.6/4.4 14/19.2/10.3 13.91% |||| -14.6 (-20.467 to -8.733)

Yiu 2008 15/18/3 18/27.5/4.7 29.74% |||||||| -9.5 (-12.1494 to -6.8506)
Gabor 2005 10/30.8/18.7 10/42.7/9.1 3.91% | -11.9 (-24.7897 to 0.9897)
Skobel 2005 18/3/2 18/18/8 22.68% |||||||| -15 (-18.8095 to -11.1905)
100% ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||| -11.7566 (-14.4328 to -9.0803)

-30 -20 -10 0 10

MD
Figure 11—Meta-analysis of AHI from CRT treatment trials

confidence in their effectiveness and to justify more than an moderate level of evidence. Table 10 shows the overall results.
OPTION level of recommendation. All studies showed statistically significant improvement in
LVEF with CRT.89-94 The meta-analysis indicated an increase in
4.2.7 Cardiac Interventions and CSAS LVEF by 8% [95% CI: 5% to 12%] as shown in Figure 10. Five
Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) involves simulta- of the 6 studies showed statistically significant improvement
neous pacing of one or both ventricles in patients with bundle in AHI.68-71,73,74 One study did not show a statistically signifi-
branch blocks. Ventricular dyssynchrony in patients with CHF cant improvement in AHI but did show a statistically significant
can further impair cardiac pump function of an already failing decrease in CSR events.93 The meta-analysis of all 6 studies
ventricle. CRT may improve pump performance and reverse showed an average decrease in AHI by 12 with CRT [95% CI:
the deleterious process of ventricular remodeling. The available −9 to −14] as shown in Figure 11.
data examining the effect of CRT on CSAS had a methodologi- Atrial overdrive pacing (AOP) paces the atria at a higher
cal limitation as the studies were not randomized, resulting in a rate, usually 15-20 beats above the baseline heart rate. AOP
SLEEP, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2012 31 CSA Practice Parameters—Aurora et al
helps CSAS probably by increasing cardiac output, decreasing apneas were observed with the bicarbonate buffer compared
pulmonary venous congestion, and shortening the circulation with acetate buffer (3 [range, 0-15] on bicarbonate and 33
time. In the second part of Lüthje’s90 study, 30 patients were [range, 0-180] on acetate). There were no differences in oxygen
studied in a randomized crossover manner for 1 night. There saturation. The central apnea index decreased from 5.5 to 0.6/h
was no statistically significant improvement with the addition on bicarbonate. Hypopneas were also significantly reduced
of AOP to CRT (AHI 25.7 ± 17.5 vs. 23.7 ± 17.9, P = 0.07). with bicarbonate (19 vs. 13 per night).
Cardiac transplant is most commonly used for patients with In a non-randomized crossover study, Hanly and Pierratos99
cardiomyopathy. In a prospective non-randomized controlled compared nocturnal hemodialysis to conventional hemodialysis
study,95 the association between heart transplant and CSAS was in 7 patients with chronic renal failure sleep disordered breath-
investigated in a post hoc analysis. In this randomized controlled ing events that were an equal distribution of central, mixed, and
trial, 13 participants with CHF + CSAS and 9 subjects with CHF obstructive apneas. After a treatment period of 6-15 months, the
but without CSAS underwent cardiac transplant. AHI, LVEF, central apnea hypopnea index compared to baseline values was
and urinary norepinephrine excretion (UNE) were assessed at lower with nocturnal dialysis (4 ± 2) vs. conventional hemodi-
the time of enrollment and at an average of 13 months post alysis (24 ± 27).
operatively. In participants with CSAS, the AHI dropped from
28 ± 15 to 7 ± 6. Six patients were effectively cured (AHI < 5), 4.3. The following possible treatment options for CSAS
CSAS persisted (AHI = 12.3 ± 0.9) in 3 patients, and 4 subjects related to end stage renal disease may be considered: CPAP,
developed OSA. No one in the control group (those without supplemental oxygen, bicarbonate buffer use during dialysis,
CSAS) developed OSA after heart transplant. Thus, even after and nocturnal dialysis. (OPTION)
normalization of cardiac function post-transplant, CSAS may Values and Trade-offs: At this time, the level of evidence
persist, and OSA may develop. Both groups had significant im- is very low and the estimate of benefits vs. harms is unclear
provements in LVEF (CSAS group, 19.2% ± 9.3% to 53.7% regarding any specific mode of therapy in ESRD patients
± 6.1%, P < 0.001) and significant reductions in UNE (CSAS with CSAS; therefore, an OPTION level of recommenda-
group, 48.1 ± 30.9 to 6.5 ± 4.8, P < 0.01). tion has been accorded. However, despite the very low level
The optimization of pharmacological therapy and the use of of evidence, it is clear that bicarbonate buffer is preferable
non-pharmacological methods to treat CHF or cardiomyopathy during hemodialysis in these patients. Further studies are
can lead to an improvement in CSAS. Interventions including needed to elucidate the role of oxygen, CPAP, bicarbonate
CRT, AOP, and cardiac transplant are procedures that require buffer use during dialysis, and nocturnal hemodialysis in
specialized skills, have significant morbidity, are costly, and are patients with ESRD.
not readily available. Despite the improvement noted in CSAS
with these therapies, indications for these interventions are lim- 4.4 CSAS Due to High-Altitude Periodic Breathing
ited to those settings delineated by the cardiology literature. Periodic breathing during sleep results during the acclimati-
zation period after rapid ascent to high altitudes. Three studies
4.3 CSAS Due to Medical Condition Not Cheyne Stokes: ESRD evaluated the effect of pharmacologic drugs on periodic breath-
CSAS can also occur with diseases and conditions other than ing at high altitude. The pharmacologic treatments included ac-
congestive heart failure such as end-stage renal disease (ESRD). etazolamide,100 theophylline,100 temazepam,101 zolpidem,102 and
Since there are only 4 studies, all using different treatments, and zaleplon.102 A meta-analysis could not be performed as there
all having significant limitations, the quality of evidence is very were not a sufficient number of studies investigating any one
low. This precluded conducting a meta-analysis. The treatments particular therapy. The reported outcome measures were dif-
fell into 2 groups: ventilatory (oxygen or CPAP) and dialysis ferent for the different studies. Two100,102 reported AHI, while 1
(types of buffers or nocturnal). reported percent time spent in periodic breathing.101
In a non-randomized study, Kumagai et al.96 reported on the In 1 study with 33 participants, theophylline was found to be
effect of oxygen in 11 peritoneal dialysis patients with sleep equally effective compared with acetazolamide in normalizing
apnea syndrome. The nocturnal average oxygen saturation and high-altitude periodic breathing (median AHI on the first night
minimum nocturnal oxygen saturation improved significantly. at altitude for placebo was 16.2 [range 3-92], acetazolamide was
The AHI decreased from 31.1 ± 8.8 to 12.7 ± 8.5/h, and the 2.5 [0-11], and theophylline was 4.2 [0-19]).100 Additionally,
central apnea index decreased from 4.0 ± 4.0 to 0.8 ± 1.2/h only acetazolamide significantly improved basal oxyhemoglobin
with oxygen. The authors note that the greatest effect of oxygen saturation during sleep (86.2% ± 1.7% versus 81.0% ± 3.0%).
was on central apneas and hypopneas with little effect on ob- While no major side effects were noted, 60% of the subjects on
structive apneas. In a non-randomized treatment study without acetazolamide developed paresthesias in their hands and feet and
blinded scoring, Pressman et al.97 reported the effect of 1 night impaired taste of fizzy drinks. Of the subjects on theophylline,
of CPAP on 6 renal failure patients with CSAS and mixed ap- 70% reported heart palpitations. Nearly all subjects (including
neas. CPAP was effective reducing the overall AHI (from 60.8 placebo) reported increased diuresis, especially during the night.
± 43.4 to 6.0 ± 3.8) and improving oxygen saturation. Nickol et al.101 reported that temazepam significantly de-
In a study limited by imprecision, Jean et al.98 reported the creased the proportion of time in periodic breathing (16% to
effect of bicarbonate versus acetate buffer during hemodialy- 9.4%, median) without any adverse effect on next-day reaction
sis on 10 patients. While there were no significant differences time, maintenance of wakefulness, or cognition. However, te-
in blood gas with either agent, there as an expected significant mazepam use was associated with a small decrease in oxygen
increase in serum bicarbonate with both buffers. Fewer central saturation, 78% (65% to 84%) to 76% (64% to 83%) (P = 0.013).
SLEEP, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2012 32 CSA Practice Parameters—Aurora et al
 Beaumont et al.102 also studied the effect of zolpidem and cludes the formation of a recommendation. Further studies are
zaleplon vs. placebo, and found no change in ventilatory pa- clearly needed to corroborate or refute the conclusions and
rameters in simulated high altitude; however, slow wave sleep to determine if CPAP is less effective than BPAP or ASV in
improved. The apnea index and AHI significantly increased at these patients. Assessment for discontinuation of opioid use
altitude, and all apnea episodes observed were central apneas. and substitution of other forms of pain relief seems prudent.
In comparison to placebo, the overall apnea index and the mean
or lowest SaO2 were not significantly changed; however, there 5.0 FUTURE DIRECTIONS
was a trend towards a decrease (of 50%) in the apnea index with The existing literature highlights the paucity of data avail-
zolpidem in the first 3 h of the night. able on the treatment of central sleep apnea syndromes. The
At this time, the level of evidence is very low regarding use most extensive literature for CSAS therapy pertains to the use
of a particular pharmacological agent to prevent CSAS related of positive airway pressure therapy devices. Even here, the
to high altitude and precludes the formation of a recommenda- overall quality of evidence is moderate at best, and further in-
tion at this time. These medications should be used only for a vestigations are clearly needed to consider additional outcome
short period of time due to the nature of the disorder. Further measures, identify factors that predict response to PAP therapy,
information on standard treatments for acute mountain sickness and estimate cost effectiveness. The SERVE-HF106 is a large,
can be found in Imray et al.103 multicenter RCT that began recruiting participants in 2008. The
objectives of this study include evaluating the long-term effects
4.5 CSAS due to Drug or Substance and cost effectiveness of ASV on mortality and morbidity in
The literature assessing treatment of CSAS due to drug or patients with CHF with CSAS. Results are expected in 2012 at
substances is markedly limited, with a total of only 4 studies the earliest. Another upcoming and notable study is the “Effect
found on the topic of CSAS associated with chronic opioid of Adaptive Servo Ventilation (ASV) on Survival and Hospital
use. No other data on the effectiveness of CPAP on CSAS due Admissions in Heart Failure (ADVENT-HF).” The primary ob-
to drug or substance were found that met inclusion criteria. A jective of this study is to determine if ASV can reduce the rate
small non-randomized study6 with limitations addressed the of cardiovascular related hospital admissions and mortality in
treatment of patients on opioids (120-420 mg/d) for chronic individuals with heart failure and sleep apnea (both obstruc-
pain who had developed CSAS and were non-responsive to tive and central sleep apnea). Trial completion is anticipated
CPAP. Bilevel PAP therapy for 6 months in 4 patients de- for 2015. It is also worth mention that the use of multimodality
creased the AHI from 60.2 ± 30.9 at baseline to 16.6 ± 12.3. titration studies akin to that described by Kuzniar et al.107 is a
Central apneas were eliminated in 3 of the 4 patients. In ad- potential investigative front that could identify successful PAP
dition, the ESS scores improved, there was correction of treatment more effectively and efficiently. Accordingly, there
nocturnal hypoxemia, and sleep fragmentation was reduced. is much to look forward to in terms of advancing the current
Additional oxygen therapy was required in 3 of the 4 patients literature on PAP therapy for CSAS.
due to continuing nocturnal hypoxemia that was attributed to The level of evidence looking at therapeutic modalities other
a history of smoking. Allam et al.23 showed that ASV is a po- than PAP therapies is even more limited both in quality and
tential treatment as well (see section 5.2.6 for more details), quantity. Specifically, data on medications and the possible use
but details were not given on the breakdown of patients with of carbon dioxide are sparse and inexact. Recommendation
CSAS secondary to CHF versus those with CSAS secondary levels on pharmacological therapies were generally an option
to opioids. From the reported data, only 5 patients on opioids level, as evidence was overall low or very low quality, and the
were included in the results. In another small non-randomized benefits and harms are unclear. Further elucidation of the poten-
trial, Javaheri et al.104 reported that ASV improved sleep dis- tial role of carbon dioxide and pharmacological interventions
ordered breathing better than CPAP in 5 patients on chronic for the treatment of CSAS is necessary.
opioid treatment (252 ± 150 mg/d). The AHI decreased from Also, the level of evidence on CSAS not due to CHF (i.e.,
70 ± 19 at baseline to 55 ± 25 with CPAP and to 20 ± 18 with primary, in conjunction with ESRD or other medical condi-
ASV. The CAI decreased from 26 ± 27 at baseline to 0 ± 0 on tions, or due to drug or substance) is very low, and more re-
ASV, while actually increasing with CPAP. There appeared search is needed to enable recommendations to be more made
to be no difference in the effect on hypopneas between CPAP with more certainty.
and ASV. Lastly, Farney et al.105 retrospectively studied 22 Controversy remains as to whether complex sleep apnea rep-
consecutive patients who had been using opioid therapy for resents an independent and sustained sleep related breathing
at least 6 months who were referred for suspected sleep apnea disorder, or whether it is a temporary occurrence108 that eventu-
(but not CSR). Neither CPAP nor ASV significantly changed ally abates with continued PAP therapy. Further studies to re-
the average AHI after 1 night of treatment (baseline, 66.6 ± solve this debate are warranted.
37.3; CPAP 70.1 ± 32.6; ASV 54.2 ± 33.0). In addition, ASV Other novel therapies that are being examined include po-
did not significantly reduce the mean CAI (baseline 26.4 ± sitional therapy for patients with CSAS and heart failure,109,110
25.1 to 15.6 ± 23.0), while CPAP significantly increased it exercise therapy,111 as well as new ventilation/positive airway
to 48.1 ± 27.1. The discrepancy between the results obtained pressure treatments for patients with and without heart dis-
by Javaheri et al.104 and Farney et al.105 may be related to the ease.112 Research exploring alternate therapeutic options such
methodology and the method of titration of ASV. At this time, as these and others is essential.
the amount of evidence is very low with respect to therapy While significant progress has been made in developing
for patients with CSAS associated with opioid use and pre- therapies for CSAS, the current review underscores the need
SLEEP, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2012 33 CSA Practice Parameters—Aurora et al
to enhance the quality, quantity, as well as the scope of future 22. Morgenthaler TI, Gay PC, Gordon N, Brown LK. Adaptive servoventila-
tion versus noninvasive positive pressure ventilation for central, mixed,
studies to optimize patient care strategies for the treatment of and complex sleep apnea syndromes. Sleep 2007;30:468-75.
these disorders. 23. Allam J, Olson E, Gay P, Morgentahaler T. Efficacy of adaptive servoven-
tilation in treatment of complex and central sleep apnea syndromes. Chest
FOOTNOTE A 2007;132:1839-46.
24. Xie A, Rankin F, Rutherford R, Bradley T. Effects of inhaled CO2 and
ESTIMATE OF EFFECT: The observed relationship be- added dead space on idiopathic central sleep apnea. J Appl Physiol
tween an intervention and an outcome expressed as, for exam- 1997;82:918-26.
ple, a number needed to treat, odds ratio, risk difference, risk 25. DeBacker W, Verbraecken J, Willemen M, Wittesaele W, DeCock W, Van
ratio, relative risk reduction, standardized mean difference, or de Heyning P. Central apnea index decreases after prolonged treatment
with acetazolamide. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1995;151:87-91.
weighted mean difference.12 26. White D, Zwillich C, Pickett C, Douglas N, Findley L, Weil J. Central
sleep apnea: improvement with acetazolamide therapy. Arch Intern Med
DISCLOSURE STATEMENT 1982;142:1816-9.
This is not an industry supported study. The authors have 27. Quadri S, Drake C, Hudgel DW. Improvement of idiopathic central sleep
apnea with zolpidem. J Clin Sleep Med 2009;5:122-9.
indicated no financial conflicts of interest. 28. Bonnet M, Dexter J, Arand D. The effect of triazolam on arousal and res-
piration in central sleep apnea patients. Sleep 1990;13:31-41.
REFERENCES 29. Arzt M, Floras J, Logan A, et al. Suppression of central sleep apnea by
1. Balshem H, Helfand M, Schunemann H, et al. GRADE guidelines: 3. Rat- continuous positive airway pressure and transplant-free survival in heart
ing the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol 2011;64:401-6. failure: a post hoc analysis of the Canadian continuous positive airway
2. American Academy of Sleep Medicine. International classification of pressure of patients with central sleep apnea and heart failure trial (CAN-
sleep disorders, second edition: diagnostic and coding manual. Westches- PAP). Circulation 2007;115:3173-80.
ter, IL: American Academy of Sleep Medicine; 2005. 30. Bradley T, Logan A, Kimoff R, et al. Continuous positive airway
3. Mezon B, West P, Israels J, Kryger M. Sleep breathing abnormalities in pressure for central sleep apnea and heart failure. New Engl J Med
kyphoscoliosis. Am Rev Respir Dis 1980;122:617-21. 2005;353:2025-33.
4. Bitter T, Faber L, et al. Sleep-disordered breathing in heart failure with 31. Krachman S, Crocetti J, Berger T, Chatila W, Eisen H, D’Alonzo G. Ef-
normal left ventricular ejection fraction. Eur Heart J 2009;11:602-8. fects of nasal continuous positive airway pressure on oxygen body stores
5. Javaheri S, Parker TJ, Liming JD, et al. Sleep apnea in 81 ambulatory in patients with Cheyne-Stokes respiration and congestive heart failure.
male patients with stable heart failure: types and their prevalences, conse- Chest 2003;123:59-66.
quences, and presentations. Circulation 1998;97:2154-9. 32. Naughton M, Benard D, Liu P, Rutherford R, Rankin F, Bradley T. Effects
6. Alattar M, Scharf S. Opioid-associated central sleep apnea: a case series. of nasal CPAP on sympathetic activity in patients with heart failure and
Sleep Breath 2009;13:201-6. central sleep apnea. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1995;152:473-9.
7. Wang D, Teichtahl H, Drummer O, et al. Central sleep apnea in stable 33. Sin D, Logan A, Fitzgerald F, Liu P, Bradley T. Effects of continuous posi-
methadone maintenance treatment patients. Chest 2005;128:1348-56. tive airway pressure on cardiovascular outcomes in heart failure patients
8. Marin J, Carrizo S, Vicente E, Agusti A. Long-term cardiovascular out- with and without Cheyne-Stokes respiration. Circulation 2000;102:61-6.
comes in men with obstructive sleep apnoea-hypopnoea with or without 34. Tkacova R, Liu P, Naughton M, Bradley T. Effect of continuous posi-
treatment with continuous positive airway pressure: an observational tive airway pressure on mitral regurgitant fraction and atrial natriuretic
study. Lancet 2005;365:1046-53. peptide in patients with heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol 1997;30:739-45.
9. Punjabi NM, Caffo BS, Goodwin JL, et al. Sleep-disordered breathing 35. Ruttanaumpawan P, Logan A, Floras J, Bradley T, Investigators C. Effect
and mortality: a prospective cohort study. PLoS Med 2009;6:e1000132. of continuous positive airway pressure on sleep structure in heart failure
10. Young T, Finn L, Peppard P, et al. Sleep disordered breathing and mor- patients with central sleep apnea. Sleep 2009;32:91-98.
tality: Eighteen-year follow-up of the Wisconsin Sleep Cohort. Sleep 36. Dohi T, Kasai T, Narui K, et al. Bi-level positive airway pressure ventila-
2008;31:1071-8. tion for treating heart failure with central sleep apnea that is unresponsive
11. Javaheri S, Shukla R, Zeigler H, Wexler L. Central sleep apnea, right to continuous postitive airway pressure. Circ J 2008;72:1100-5.
ventricular dysfunction, and low diastolic blood pressure are predictors 37. Yasuma F. Cheyne-Stokes respiration in congestive heart failure: Con-
of mortality in systolic heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol 2007;49:2028-34. tinuous positive airway pressure of 5-8 cm H2O for 1 year in five cases.
12. GRADEPro [computer program]2008. Respiration 2005;72:198-201.
13. Guyatt G, Oxman A, Akl EA, et al. GRADE guidelines: 1. Introduction- 38. Granton J, Naughton M, Benard D, Liu P, Goldstein R, Bradley T. CPAP
GRADE evidence profiles and summary of findings tables. J Clin Epide- improves inspiratory muscle strength in patients with heart failure and
miol 2011;64:383-94. central sleep apnea. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1996;153:277-82.
14. Zaza S, Wright-DeAguaero LK, Briss P, et al. Data collection instrument 39. Naughton M, Liu P, Benard D, Goldstein R, Bradley T. Treatment of
and procedure for systematic reviews in the Guide to Community Preven- congestive heart failure and Cheyne-Stokes respiration during sleep
tive Services. Am J Prev Med 2000;18:44-74. by continuous positive airway pressure. Am J Respir Crit Care Med
15. Atkins D, Best D, Briss P, et al. Grading and quality of evidence and 1995;151:92-97.
strength of recommendations. BMJ 2004;328:1490-4. 40. Guilleminault C, Clerk A, Labanowski M, Simmons J, Stoohs R. Cardiac
16. Schunemann H, Jaeschke R, Cook D, et al. An official ATS statement: failure and benzodiazepines. Sleep 1993;16:524-8.
Grading the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations in 41. Davies R, Harrington K, Ormerod O, Stradling J. Nasal continuous posi-
ATS guidelines and recommendations. Am J Respir Crit Care Med tive airway pressure in chronic heart failure with sleep-disordered breath-
2006;174:605-14. ing. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1993;147:630-4.
17. Bax L, Yu L, Ikeda N, Tsuruta H, Moons K. Development and valida- 42. Takasaki Y, Orr D, Popkin J, Rutherford R, Liu P, Bradley T. Effect of
tion of MIX: Comprehensive free software for meta-analysis of causal nasal continuous positive airway pressure on sleep apnea in congestive
research data. BMC Med Res Methodol 2006;6:50. heart failure. Am Rev Respir Dis 1989;140:1578-84.
18. Bax L, Yu L, Ikeda N, Tsuruta H, Moons K. MIX: Comprehensive free 43. Naughton M, Benard D, Rutherford R, Bradley T. Effect of continuous
software for meta-analysis of causal research data. Version 1.7. http:// positive airway pressure on central sleep apnea and nocturnal PCO2 in heart
mix-for-meta-analysis.info. 2008. failure. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1994;1509:1598-604.
19. Aurora R, Morgentahaler T. On the goodness of recommendations: the 44. Javaheri S. Effects of continuous positive airway pressure on sleep ap-
changing face of practice parameters. Sleep 2010;33:1273-6. nea and ventricular irritability in patients with heart failure. Circulation
20. Javaheri S, Smith J, Chung E. The prevalence and natural history of com- 2000;101:392-7.
plex sleep apnea. J Clin Sleep Med 2009;5:205-11. 45. Noda A, Izawa H, Asano H, et al. Beneficial effect of bilevel positive
21. Kuzniar TJ, Pusalavidyasagar S, Gay PC, Morgenthaler TI. Natu- airway pressure on left ventricular function in ambulatory patients with
ral course of complex sleep apnea: a retrospective study. Sleep Breath idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy and central sleep apnea-hypopnea: a
2008;12:135-9. preliminary study. Chest 2007;131:1694-701.
SLEEP, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2012 34 CSA Practice Parameters—Aurora et al
46. Kasai T, Narui K, Dohi T, et al. Efficacy of nasal bi-level positive airway 70. Sasayama S, Izumi T, Matsuzaki M, et al. Improvement of quality of life
pressure in congestive heart failure patients with Cheyne-Stokes respira- with nocturnal oxygen therapy in heart failure patients with central sleep
tion and central sleep apnea. Circ J 2005;69:913-21. apnea. Circ J 2009;73:1255-62.
47. Willson G, Wilcox I, Piper A, et al. Noninvasive pressure preset venti- 71. Shigemitsu M, Nishio K, Kusuyama T, Itoh S, Konno N, Katagiri T. Noc-
lation for the treatment of Cheyne-Stokes respiration during sleep. Eur turnal oxygen therapy prevents progress of congestive heart failure with
Respir J 2001;17:1250-7. central sleep apnea. Int J Cardiol 2007;115:354-60.
48. Willson G, Wilcox I, Piper A, Flynn W, Grunstein R, Sullivan C. Treat- 72. Franklin K, Eriksson P, Sahlin C, Lundgren R. Reversal of central sleep
ment of central sleep apnoea in congestive heart failure with nasal ventila- apnea with oxygen. Chest 1997;111:163-9.
tion. Thorax. 1998;53(Suppl 3):S41-46. 73. Javaheri S, Ahmed M, Parker T, Brown C. Effects of nasal O2 on sleep-
49. Kohnlein T, Welte T, Tan L, Elliott M. Assisted ventilation for heart failure related disordered breathing in ambulatory patients with stable heart fail-
patients with Cheyne-Stokes respiration. Eur Respir J 2002;20:934-41. ure. Sleep 1999;22:1101-6.
50. Kuzniar T, Morgentahaler T. Treatment of complex sleep apnea syn- 74. Krachman S, Nugent T, Crocetti J, D’Alonzo G, Chatila W. Effects of ox-
drome. Curr Treat Opt Neurol 2008;10:336-41. ygen therapy on left ventricular function in patients with Cheyne-Stokes
51. Pepperell J, Maskell N, Jones D, et al. A randomized controlled trial of respiration and congestive heart failure. J Clin Sleep Med 2005;1:271-6.
adaptive ventilation for Cheyne-Stokes breathing in heart failure. Am J 75. Brostrom A, Hubbert L, Jakobsson P, Johansson P, Fridlund B, Dahlstrum
Respir Crit Care Med 2003;168:1109-14. U. Effects of long-term nocturnal oxygen treatment in patients with se-
52. Oldenburg O, Schmidt A, Lamp B, et al. Adaptive servoventilation im- vere heart failure. J Cardiovasc Nurs 2005;20:385-96.
proves cardiac function in patients with chronic heart failure and Cheyne- 76. Arzt M, Schulz M, Wensel R, et al. Nocturnal continuous positive airway
Stokes respiration. Eur J Heart Fail 2008;10:581-6. pressure improves ventilatory efficiency during exercise in patients with
53. Szollosi I, O’Driscoll D, Dayer M, Coats A, Morrell M, Simonds A. chronic heart failure. Chest 2005;127:794-802.
Adaptive servo-ventilation and deadspace: effects on central sleep ap- 77. Krachman S, D’Alonzo G, Berger T, Eisen H. Comparison of oxygen ther-
noea. J Sleep Res 2006;14:199-205. apy with nasal continuous positive airway pressure on Cheyne-Stokes res-
54. Fietze I, Blau A, Glos M, Theres H, Baumann G, Penzel T. Bi-level posi- piration during sleep in congestive heart failure. Chest 1999;116:1550-7.
tive pressure ventilation and adaptive servo ventilation in patients with 78. Hu K, Li Q, Yang J, Chen X, Hu S, Wu X. The role of high-frequency jet
heart failure and Cheyne-Stokes respiration. Sleep Med 2008;9:652-9. ventilation in the treatment of Cheyne-Stokes respiration in patients with
55. Morgentahaler T, Gay P, Gordon N, Brown L. Adaptive servoventilation chronic heart failure. Int J Cardiol 2006;106:224-31.
versus noninvasive positive pressure ventilation for central, mixed, and 79. Teschler H, Dohring J, Wang Y, Berthon-Jones M. Adaptive pressure sup-
complex sleep apnea syndromes. Sleep 2007;30:468-75. port servo-ventilation: a novel treatment for Cheyne-Stokes respiration in
56. Arzt M, Wensel R, Montalvan S, et al. Effects of dynamic bilevel positive heart failure. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2001;164:614-9.
airway pressure support on central sleep apnea in men with heart failure. 80. Javaheri S. Acetazolamide improves central sleep apnea in heart fail-
Chest 2008;134:61-6. ure: a double-blind, prospective study. Am J Respir Crit Care Med
57. Zhang X-L, Yin K-S, Jia E-Z, Su M. Efficacy of adaptive servoventilation 2006;173:234-7.
in patients with congestive heart failure and Cheyne-Stokes respiration. 81. Javaheri S, Parker T, Wexler L, Liming J, Lindower P, Roselle G. Effect
Chin Med J 2006;119:622-7. of theophylline on sleep-disordered breathing in heart failure. N Engl J
58. Koyama T, Watanabe H, Kobukai Y, et al. Beneficial effects of adap- Med 1996;335:562-7.
tive servo ventilation in patients with chronic heart failure. Circ J 82. Hu K, Li Q, Yang J, Hu S, Chen X. The effect of theophylline on sleep-
2010;74:2118-24. disordered breathing in patients with stable chronic congestive heart fail-
59. Oldenburg O, Bitter T, Lehmann R, et al. Adaptive servoventilation ure. Chin Med J 2003;116:1711-6.
improves cardiac function and respiratory stability. Clin Res Cardiol 83. Tamura A, Kawano Y, Kadota J. Carvedilol reduces the severity of central
2011;100:107-15. sleep apnea in chronic heart failure. Circ J 2009;73:295-8.
60. Kasai T, Usui Y, Yoshioka T, et al. Effect of flow-triggered adaptive servo- 84. Tamura A, Kawano Y, Naono S, Kotoku M, Kadota J-i. Relationship be-
ventilation compared with continuous positive airway pressure in patients tween beta-blocker treatment and the severity of central sleep apnea in
with chronic heart failure with coexisting obstructive sleep apnea and chronic heart failure. Chest 2007;131:130-5.
Cheyne-Stokes respiration. Circ Heart Fail 2010;3:140-8. 85. Walsh J, Andrews R, Starling R, Cowley A, Johnston I, Kinnear W. Ef-
61. Philippe C, Stoica-Herman M, Drouot X, et al. Compliance with and ef- fects of captopril and oxygen on sleep apnoea in patients with mild to
fectiveness of adaptive servoventilation versus continuous positive air- moderate congestive cardiac failure. Br Heart J 1995;73:237-41.
way pressure in the treatment of Cheyne-Stokes respiration in heart fail- 86. Zilberman M, Silverberg D, Bits I, et al. Improvement of anemia with
ure over a six month period. Heart 2006;92:337-42. erythropoietin and intravenous iron reduces sleep-related breathing disor-
62. Brown L. Adaptive servo-ventilation for sleep apnea: technology, titration ders and improves daytime sleepiness in anemic patients with congestive
protocols, and treatment efficacy. Sleep Med Clin 2010;5:419-37. heart failure. Am Heart J 2007;154:870-6.
63. Chowdhuri S, Shanidze I, Pierchala L, Belen D, Mateika J, Badr M. Ef- 87. Andreas S, Weidel K, Hagenah G, Heindl S. Treatment of Cheyne-
fect of episodic hypoxia on the susceptibility to hypocapnic central apnea Stokes respiration with nasal oxygen and carbon dioxide. Eur Respir J
during NREM sleep. J Appl Physiol 2010;108:368-77. 1998;12:414-9.
64. Xie A, Skatrud J, Puleo D, Dempsey J. Influence of arterial O2 on the 88. Steens R, Millar T, Xiaoling S, et al. Effect of inhaled 3% CO2 on Cheyne-
susceptibility to posthyperventilation apnea during sleep. J Appl Physiol Stokes respiration in congestive heart failure. Sleep 1994;17:61-8.
2006;100:171-7. 89. Oldenburg O, Faber L, Vogt J, et al. Influence of cardiac resynchronisa-
65. Sasayama S, Izumi T, Seino Y, Ueshima K, Asanoi H. Effects of nocturnal tion therapy on different types of sleep disordered breathing. Eur J Heart
oxygen therapy on outcome measures in patients with chronic heart fail- Fail 2007;9:820-6.
ure and cheyne-stokes respiration. Circ J 2006;70:1-7. 90. Luthje L, Renner B, Kessels R, et al. Cardiac resynchronization therapy
66. Hanly P, Millar T, Steljes D, Baert R, Frais M, Kryger M. The effect of and atrial overdrive pacing for the treatment of central sleep apnoea. Eur
oxygen on respiration and sleep in patients with congestive heart failure. J Heart Fail 2009;11:273-80.
Ann Intern Med 1989;111:777-82. 91. Sinha A-M, Skobel E, Breithardt O-A, et al. Cardiac resynchronization
67. Staniforth A, Kinnear W, Starling R, Hetmanski D, Cowley A. Effect of therapy improves central sleep apnea and Cheyne-Stokes respiration in
oxygen on sleep quality, cognitive function, and sympathetic activity in patients with chronic heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004;44:68-71.
patients with chronic heart failure and Cheyne-Stokes respiration. Eur 92. Yiu K, Lee K, Lau C, et al. Alleviation of pulmonary hypertension by car-
Heart J 1998;19:922-8. diac resynchronization therapy is associated with improvement in central
68. Andreas S, Clemens C, Sandholzer H, Figulla H, Kreuzer H. Improvement sleep apnea. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2008;31:1522-7.
of exercise capacity with treatment of Cheyne-Stokes respiration in pa- 93. Gabor J, Newman D, Barnard-Roberts V, et al. Improvement in Cheyne-
tients with congestive heart failure. J Am Coll Cardiol 1996;27:1486-90. Stokes respiration following cardiac resynchronization therapy. Eur
69. Toyama T, Seki R, Kasama S, et al. Effectiveness of nocturnal home oxy- Respir J 2005;26:95-100.
gen therapy to improve exercise capacity, cardiac function and cardiac 94. Skobel E, Sinha A-M, Randerath W, Breidhardt OB, C. Effect of cardiac
sympathetic nerve activiy in patients with chronic heart failure and central resynchronization therapy on sleep quality, quality of life, and symptom-
sleep apnea. Circ J 2009;73:299-304. atic depression in patients with chronic heart failure and Cheyne, Stokes
respiration. Sleep Breath 2005;9:159-66.
SLEEP, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2012 35 CSA Practice Parameters—Aurora et al
 95. Mansfield D, Solin P, Roebuck T, Bergin P, Kaye D, Naughton M. The 104. Javaheri S, Malik A, Smith J, Chung E. Adaptive pressure support ser-
effect of successful heart transplant treatment of heart failure on central voventilation: a novel treatment for sleep apnea associated with use of
sleep apnea. Chest 2003;124:1675-81. opioids. J Clin Sleep Med 2008;4:305-10.
96. Kumagai T, Ishibashi Y, Kawarazaki H, et al. Effects of nocturnal oxy- 105. Farney R, Walker J, Boyle K, Cloward T, Shilling K. Adaptive servoven-
gen therapy on sleep apnea syndrome in peritoneal dialysis patients. Clin tilation (asv) in patients with sleep disordered breathing associated with
Nephrol 2008;70:332-9. chronic opioid medications for non-malignant pain. J Clin Sleep Med
97. Pressman M, Benz R, Schleifer C, Peterson D. Sleep disordered breathing 2008;4:311-9.
in ESRD: acute beneficial effects of treatment with nasal continuous posi- 106. SERVE-HF. Treatment of sleep-disordered breathing by adaptive servo-
tive airway pressure. Kidney Int 1993;43:1134-9. ventilation in HF patients. http://www.servehf.com/en/Health-profession-
98. Jean G, Piperno D, Francois B, Charra B. Sleep apnea incidence in main- als/objective-of-the-study.html. Accessed July 2,2010.
tenance hemodialysis patients: influence of dialysate buffer. Nephron 107. Kuzniar T, Golbin J, Morgentahaler T. Moving beyond empiric con-
1995;71:138-42. tinuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) trials for central sleep apnea: a
99. Hanly P, Pierratos A. Improvement of sleep apnea in patients with multi-modality titration study. Sleep Breath 2007;11:259-66.
chronic renal failure who undergo nocturnal hemodialysis. N Engl J Med 108. Javaheri S, Smith J, Chung E. The prevalence and natural history of com-
2001;344:102-7. plex sleep apnea. J Clin Sleep Med 2009;5:205-11.
100. Fischer R, Lang S, Leitl M, Thiere M, Steiner U, Huber R. Theophylline 109. Joho S, Oda Y, Hirai T, Inoue H. Impact of sleeping position on cen-
and acetazolamide reduce sleep-disordered breathing at high altitude. Eur tral sleep apnea/Cheyne-Stokes respiration in patients with heart failure.
Respir J 2004;23:47-52. Sleep Med 2010;11:143-8.
101. Nickol A, Leverment J, Richards P, et al. Temazepam at high altitude 110. Soll BA, Yeo KK, Davis JW, Seto TB, Schatz IJ, Shen EN. The effect
reduces periodic breathing without impairing next-day performance: a of posture on Cheyne-Stokes respirations and hemodynamics in patients
randomized cross-over double-blind study. J Sleep Res 2006;15:445-54. with heart failure. Sleep 2009;32:1499-506.
102. Beaumont M, Batejat D, Coste O, et al. Effects of Zolpidem and Zaleplon 111. Ueno LM, Drager LF, Rodrigues AC, et al. Effects of exercise training in
on sleep, respiratory patterns and performance at a simulated altitude of patients with chronic heart failure and sleep apnea. Sleep 2009;32:637-47.
4,000 m. Neuropsychobiology 2004;49:154-62. 112. Randerath WJ, Galetke W, Kenter M, Richter K, Schafer T. Combined
103. Imray C, Wright A, Subudhi A, Roach R. Acute mountain sickness: adaptive servo-ventilation and automatic positive airway pressure (anti-
pathophysiology, prevention, and treatment. Prog Cardiovasc Dis cyclic modulated ventilation) in co-existing obstructive and central sleep
2010;52:467-84. apnea syndrome and periodic breathing. Sleep Med 2009;10:898-903.

SLEEP, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2012 36 CSA Practice Parameters—Aurora et al

 APPENDIX—Supplemental information and data used in meta-analyses

LVEF Data for CPAP

Author, Year Duration of CPAP ∆ LVEF, CPAP ∆ LVEF, Control n (treatment / control)
Dohi, 2008 - Responders 6 mo. +9.3 ± 9.7 N/A 9
Arzt, 2007 - Suppressed 3 mo. +3.6 [2.1 to 5.1] +0.4 [-0.6 to 1.5] 57/110
Arzt, 2007 - Unsuppressed 3 mo. +0.3 [-1.0 to 1.6] 43/110
Bradley, 2005 3 mo. +2.2 ± 5.4 +0.4 ± 5.3 128/130
Yasuma, 2005 3 mo. +9.9 ± 2.5 N/A 5
12 mo. +7.3 ± 5.5
Sin, 2000 – only patients
with CSAS 3 mo. +7.8 ± 2.2* -0.5 ± 1.5* 14/15
Tkacova, 1997 3 mo. +8.0 ± 13.5 -0.5 ± 8.0 9/8
Granton, 1996 3 mo. +8.6 ± 15.4 -1.1 ± 7.9 9/8
Naughton, 1995a 1 mo. +3.7 ± 13.3 +0.1 ± 8.8 12/12
3 mo. +7.7 ± 15.1 -0.5 ± 8.4 12/12
Naughton, 1995b 1 mo. +6.5 ± 12.0 -1.0 ± 10.5 9/9
Naughton, 1994 1 mo. +4.6 ± 7.9 -1.5 ± 6.5 10/4
Takasaki, 1989 3 mo. +7 ± 18 N/A 5

*Read off Figure 1 of paper.

AHI Data: RCTs + 1 NRT for CPAP

Author, Year Duration of CPAP ∆CPAP ∆Control n (treatment / control) Titrated
Bradley, 2005 / 3 mo.* -21.3 ± 15.6 -0.2 ± 21.0 97/108 N
Ruttanaumapawan, 2009 2 yrs -23.2 ± 15.9 -1.3 ± 16.0 33/38 N
Granton, 1996 3 mo. -32 ± 26 -16 ± 25 9/8 N
Naughton, 1995a 1 mo. -28.5 ± 16.1 -6.1 ± 20.8 12/12 N
Naughton, 1995b 1 mo. -29.6 ± 15.5 -8.7 ± 20.9 9/9 N
Naughton, 1994 1 mo. -35.3 ± 15.5 -13.3 ± 25.4 12/6 N

*The 3-month data was used in the meta-analysis since it has the same time-frame as the other studies and had more subjects.

AHI Data: Before-after CPAP data

Author, Year Duration of CPAP AHI baseline (± SD) AHI after CPAP (± SD) n Titrated
Bradley, 2005 /
Ruttanaumapawan, 2009 3 mo. 38.9 ± 15.0 17.6 ± 16.3 97 N
Granton, 1996 3 mo. 49 ± 33 17 ± 21 9 N
Naughton, 1995a 1 mo. 43.2 ± 17.0 14.7 ± 16.6 12 N
Naughton, 1995b 1 mo. 48.1 ± 14.7 18.5 ± 18.0 9 N
Naughton, 1994 1 mo. 54.0 ± 14.9 18.7 ± 17.3 12 N
Yasuma, 2005 3 mo. 34.7 ± 21.4 6.0 ± 7.0 5 N
6 mo. 34.7 ± 21.4 1.2 ± 1.4
Krachman, 2003 1 night 44 ± 27 15 ± 24 9 N
Takasaki, 1989 10 d to 4 wks 69 ± 20 15 ± 16 5 Y

Appendix continues on the following page

SLEEP, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2012 37 CSA Practice Parameters—Aurora et al

 APPENDIX (continued)—Supplemental information and data used in meta-analyses

LVEF Data: BPAP-ST devices

Author, Year Duration of Treatment ∆ LVEF, Fixed pressure device (%) ∆ LVEF, Control (%) n (treatment / control)
Dohi, 2008 6 mo. +12.7 ± 10.0 N/A 7/0
Kasai, 2005 3 mo. +9.9 ± 8.6 -1.4 ± 8.5 7/7

AHI Data: BPAP-ST (before-after treatment)

Author, Year Duration of Treatment AHI baseline (± SD) AHI after Fixed pressure device (± SD) n
Dohi, 2008 1 night 54.4 ± 7.8 8.4 ± 4.7 9
Kasai, 2005 1 night 49.4 ± 16.1 10 ± 8* 7
Willson, 2001 1 night 49 ± 10 6±5 9

*From Figure 1 in study.

LVEF Data ASV

Control / Comparison N (treatment / ∆ LVEF
Author, Yr Treatment Duration control) ∆ LVEF Test Treatment Control / Comparison Treatment
Kasai 2010 CPAP 3 mo. 15/15 +9.1 ± 4.7 +1.9 ± 10.9
Pepperell 2003 Sub-therapeutic ASV 4 wks 15/11 +1.8 ± 10.8 +0.6 ± 13.2
Oldenburg 2008 Baseline 6 mo. 29 +7.0 ± 9.1 N/A
Zhang 2006 Oxygen 2 wks 14 +7.0 ± 4.2 +2.4 ± 4.5
Philippe 2006 CPAP 6 mo. 7/6 +7 ± 5* -2 ± 13*
Fietze 2008 BPAP-ST 6 wks 15/15 +1.9 ± 8.1 +5.6 ± 9.5

*estimated from graph.

AHI Data: ASV

n Test Treatment Control Treatment
Control (treatment /
Author, Yr Treatment Duration control) Baseline After Baseline After
Pepperell 2003 Sub-therapeutic 1 night 15/15 24.7 ± 11.3 5.0 ± 5.4 23.3 ± 13.3 20.6 ± 8.9
ASV 4 wks 15/11 24.7 ± 11.3 5.4 ± 7.4 23.3 ± 13.3 14.7 ± 10.6
Oldenburg 2008 Baseline 6 mo. 29/0 37.4 ± 9.4 3.8 ± 4.1 N/A
Szollosi 2006 Baseline 1 night 10/0 30.0 ± 20.9 14.0 ± 12.0 N/A
Zhang 2006 Oxygen 2 weeks 14/14 34.5 ± 6.1 6.5 ± 0.8 34.5 ± 6.1 27.8 ± 8.2
Kasai 2010 CPAP 3 mo. 15/15 37.4 ± 19.5 1.9 ± 2.1 38.6 ± 13.9 15.4 ± 12.8
-35.4 ± 19.5 -23.2 ± 12.0
Arzt 2008 CPAP / BPAP 1 night 14/0 46.4 ± 15§ 4 ± 3.7§ 46.4 ± 15§ 22 ± 15§
BPAP Auto-SV
Morgenthaler 2007 CPAP 1 night 6/0 46.0 ± 22.7 0±0 46.0 ± 22.7 22.8 ± 18.2
BPAP-ST 1 night 6/0 46.0 ± 22.7 0±0 46.0 ± 22.7 1.5 ± 1.5
Philippe 2006 CPAP 3 mo. 12/** 47 ± 18 4 ± 5* 40.5 ± 13.5 **
6 mo. 9/8 3 ± 4* 21 ± 25*
Fietze 2008 BPAP-ST 6 wks 15/15 31.0 ± 10.0† 11.1 ± 9.9† 33.4 ± 20.5† 16.1 ± 16.2†

*Estimated from graph. **Data do not appear to be last-brought-forward in Figure1B for CPAP; appears to overestimate CPAP effectiveness at 3 months
(dropouts appear to be put to 0 AHI). †CSRI = CSAI+PBI (periodic breathing index). §Data given in paper were assumed to be SE and not SD as stated.

Appendix continues on the following page

SLEEP, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2012 38 CSA Practice Parameters—Aurora et al

 APPENDIX (continued)—Supplemental information and data used in meta-analyses

Oxygen LVEF Data

LVEF baseline LVEF after Oxygen LVEF baseline LVEF control n (treatment /
Author, Year Duration of Trial (± SD) (± SD) (± SD) (± SD) control)
Toyama, 2009 3 mo. 27 ± 9 37 ± 10 26 ± 8 27 ± 9 10/10
Sasayama, 2009 12 mo. 33.0 ± 8.9 38.5 ± 15.5 31.8 ± 7.6 33.0 ± 11.2 21 / 21
Shigemetsu, 2007 4 mo. 44.7 ± 11.9 46.4 ± 14.8 N/A N/A 18
Sasayama, 2006* 12 wks 34.7 ± 10.4 38.2 ± 13.6 32.8 ± 8.8 34.4 ± 10.9 24/29
Krachman, 2005 1 mo. 22 ± 11 19 ± 9 N/A N/A 10
Zhang, 2006 2 wks 30.2 ± 4.6 33.2 ± 5.1 N/A N/A 14

*This data is updated by Sasayama 2009 and not used in the meta-analysis.

Oxygen AHI Data

AHI baseline or
control* AHI after Oxygen AHI baseline AHI control n (treatment /
Author, Year Duration of Trial (± SD) (± SD) (± SD) (± SD) control)
Toyama, 2009 3 mo. 26.1 ± 9.1 5.1 ± 3.4 19.9 ± 13.0 21.0 ± 12.0 10/10
Sasayama, 2009 12 mo. 19.0 ± 12.3 9.0 ± 8.4 20.0 ± 11.4 20.8 ± 13.5 21/21
Shigemetsu, 2007 4 mo. 33.7 ± 11.1 6.2 ± 3.2 N/A N/A 18
Sasayama, 2006‡ 12 wks 21.0 ± 10.8 10.0 ± 11.6 18.0 ± 10.7 17.1 ± 11.4 25/31
Staniforth, 1998 4 wks 37.8 ± 12.9 24.9 ± 12.3 37.8 ± 12.9 38.0 ± 16.6 11
Zhang, 2006 2 wks 34.5 ± 6.1 27.8 ± 8.2 N/A N/A 14
Andreas, 1996* 1 wk 26 ± 24 10 ± 9 N/A N/A 22
Hanly, 1989* 1 night 30.0 ± 14.1 18.9 ± 7.2 N/A N/A 9
Krachman, 2005 1 mo. 57 ± 61 12 ± 17 N/A N/A 10
Broström, 2005 3 mo. 34 (24-46)** 22 (17-42)** N/A N/A 9
Javaheri, 1999 Total† 49 ± 19 29 ± 29 N/A N/A 36
1 night Responders 36 ± 11 6±4 N/A N/A 14
Partial responders 57 ± 19 44 ± 29 N/A N/A 22
Franklin, 1997 1 night 31.3 ± 13.3 8.7 ± 9.1 N/A N/A 20

‡
This data is updated by Sasayama 2009 and not used in the meta-analysis. *Control was room air or compressed air. **Data not normally distributed,
cannot use in meta-analysis. †Used total data in meta-analysis.

Oxygen vs. CPAP Data

Oxygen CPAP
Author, Year Duration of Trial Baseline (± SD) After (± SD) Baseline (± SD) After (± SD) N (trial / control)
AHI data
Arzt, 2005 12 wks 28.8 ± 10.1 8.7 ± 13.0 35.9 ± 16.0 12.2 ± 14.4 10/16
Krachman, 1999 1 night 44 ± 27 18 ± 15 N/A 15 ± 24 9
LVEF data
Arzt, 2005 12 wks 30.9 ± 7.6 32.5 ± 7.3 31.7 ± 10.4 35.7 ± 10.8 10/16

Appendix continues on the following page

SLEEP, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2012 39 CSA Practice Parameters—Aurora et al

 APPENDIX (continued)—Supplemental information and data used in meta-analyses

AHI data for pharmacological therapies for CSAS related to CHF

Duration of AHI baseline
Author, Year Treatment n (± SD) AHI after placebo (± SD) AHI after Tx (± SD)
Javaheri, 2006 6 nights 12 55 ± 24 57 ± 28 34 ± 20
Hu, 2006 5-7 days 13 42.6 ± 15.5 N/A 20.8 ± 13.2
Javaheri, 1996 5 days 15 47 ± 21 37 ± 23 18 ± 17
Tamura, 2009 6 mo 16 34 ± 13 N/A 14 ± 13
Walsh, 1995 1 month 8 35 ± 20 N/A 20 ± 14
Zilberman, 2007 3 months 35 26.5 ± 14.6 N/A 18.1 ± 12.7
Andreas, 1998 1 night 9 36.7 ± 21.9 N/A 5.4 ± 3.6
Steens, 1994 1 night 6 41.1 ± 28.9 N/A 1.0 ± 1.7

CRT LVEF Data, %

Author, Year Duration of Trial CRT off or pre-CRT (± SD) CRT on or post-CRT (± SD) n
Lüthje, 2009 3 months 20.7 ± 4.6 28.4 ± 7.7* 18
Oldenburg, 2007 5.0 ± 2.6 mo. 25.2 ± 6.1 29.1 ± 7.3 36
Yiu, 2008 3 months 28.8 ± 9.7** 38.1 ± 8.9** 15
Sinha, 2004 17 ± 7 wks 25 ± 5 35 ± 9 14
Gabor, 2005 6 months 19.0 ± 4.2 24.2 ± 7.8 10
Skobel, 2005 18 ± 7 wks 19 ± 5 33 ± 8 18

*SD calculated from data given (as a change in LVEF) in reference. **Data in paper assumed to be SEM and converted to SD.

CRT AHI Data

Author, Year Duration of Trial CRT off or pre-CRT (± SD) CRT on or post-CRT (± SD) n
Oldenburg, 2007 5.0 ± 2.6 mo. 31.2 ± 15.5 17.3 ± 13.7 36
Kara, 2008 1 night 14.3 ± 10.0 8.1 ± 5.2 12
Lüthje, 2009 3 months 37.1 ± 13.4 25.7 ± 17.5 18
Sinha, 2004 17 ± 7 wks 19.2 ± 10.3 4.6 ± 4.4 14
Yiu, 2008 3 months 27.5 ± 4.7 18.0 ± 3.0 15
Gabor, 2005 6 months 42.7 ± 9.1 30.8 ± 18.7 10
Skobel, 2005* 18 ± 7 wks 18 ± 8 3±2 18

*7/18 patients with mixed sleep apnea included in data.

SLEEP, Vol. 35, No. 1, 2012 40 CSA Practice Parameters—Aurora et al