Safety and feasibility of chronic transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation for treatment of central sleep apnea in @entity712 XXXX .

@entity1 @entity712 @entity2417 @entity548 @entity55 @entity27 @entity281
INTRODUCTION: @entity2417 ( @entity2417 ) is common in @entity1 with @entity712 ( @entity712 ) and is associated with poor quality of life and prognosis. Early acute studies using transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation (PNS) to treat @entity2417 in @entity712 have shown a significantly reduction of @entity2417 and improvement of key polysomnographic parameters. In this study, we evaluated the safety of and efficiency chronic transvenous PNS with an implanted neurostimulator in @entity712 @entity1 with @entity2417 . METHODS: This study was a prospective, nonrandomized evaluation of unilateral transvenous PNS in eight @entity712 @entity1 with @entity2417 . The stimulation lead, which connected to a proprietary neurostimulator, was positioned in either the left pericardiophrenic or right brachiocephalic vein. Monitoring during implantation and 6-monthly follow-ups were performed. RESULTS: Six of the implanted eight @entity1 completed the study (one was lost to follow-up; one died from @entity55 ). Neither side effects nor adverse events related to stimulation occurred. During the 6-monthly follow-ups, one @entity1 had a lead dislodgement in the first month and the lead was subsequently repositioned. No additional lead dislodgements occurred. There were no significant changes in sleep habits, appetite, @entity548 or @entity281 . Compared with the parameters before stimulator implantation, there were significant improvement in @entity27 index, central apnea index, left ventricular ejection fraction and 6-min walk distance (all P   <   0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Use of chronic transvenous PNS appears to be safe and feasible in @entity712 @entity1 with @entity2417 . Large multicenter studies are needed to confirm safety and efficacy in this population.
