Heart failure & cardiomyopathies
Win Ratio Analysis of Transvenous Phrenic Nerve Stimulation to Treat Central Sleep Apnoea in Heart Failure
Primary result · Win ratio (clinical benefit)Result — go to the resultWin ratio 4.92 95% CI 2.27–10.63Authors' conclusion
This WR analysis of the remedē® System Pivotal Trial suggests that TPNS may be superior to untreated CSA in HF patients with CSA using a hierarchical clinical benefit endpoint composed of mortality, HF hospitalization, and health status.
Study context
- Population
- Heart failure (HF) patients with central sleep apnoea2,064 pairwise comparisons
- Participants
- 91 patients
- Comparison
- Transvenous phrenic nerve stimulation (TPNS) vs control
- TPNSn = 43
- Controln = 48reference
- Primary endpoint
- Hierarchical win ratio:
- Longest survival
- Lowest HF hospitalisation rate
- ≥2-category difference in Patient Global Assessment
- Follow-up
- 6 months
Methodological detailspre-defined win ratio hierarchy, HF subgroup
- Pre-defined win ratio hierarchy
- HF subgroup
Primary result
Win ratio (clinical benefit)
Win ratio
4.92
95% CI 2.27–10.63
P < 0.0001
Events by treatment group
TPNSvs Control
WR 4.92 (95% CI 2.27–10.63); P < 0.0001
As reported in the abstract
Further findings
Sensitivity analyses (Epworth Sleepiness Scale or 4% oxygen desaturation index as third component; 4-component hierarchy)
- Large win ratio (WRs) observed for all additional WR hierarchies
Original publication
Win Ratio Analysis of Transvenous Phrenic Nerve Stimulation to Treat Central Sleep Apnoea in Heart Failure. ESC Heart Fail. Published 18 October 2024. doi:10.
Composed by AI from the published abstract and checked against it. How Briefs are made →