Effects of Short-Term Continuous Positive Airway Pressure on Myocardial Sympathetic Nerve Function and Energetics in Patients With Heart Failure and Obstructive Sleep Apnea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), 2 states of increased metabolic demand and sympathetic nervous system activation, often coexist. Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), which alleviates OSA, can improve ventricular function. It is unknown whether this is due to altered oxidative metabolism or presynaptic sympathetic nerve function. We hypothesized that short-term (6-8 weeks) CPAP in patients with OSA and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction would improve myocardial sympathetic nerve function and energetics. METHODS AND RESULTS: Forty-five patients with OSA and heart failure with reduced ejection fraction (left ventricular ejection fraction 35.8±9.7% [mean±SD]) were evaluated with the use of echocardiography and 11C-acetate and 11C-hydroxyephedrine positron emission tomography before and ≈6 to 8 weeks after randomization to receive short-term CPAP (n=22) or no CPAP (n=23). Work metabolic index, an estimate of myocardial efficiency, was calculated as follows: (stroke volume index×heart rate×systolic blood pressure÷Kmono), where Kmono is the monoexponential function fit to the myocardial 11C-acetate time-activity data, reflecting oxidative metabolism. Presynaptic sympathetic nerve function was measured with the use of the 11C-hydroxyephedrine retention index. CPAP significantly increased hydroxyephedrine retention versus no CPAP (Δretention: +0.012 [0.002, 0.021] versus -0.006 [-0.013, 0.005] min(-1); P=0.003). There was no significant change in work metabolic index between groups. However, in those with more severe OSA (apnea-hypopnea index>20 events per hour), CPAP significantly increased both work metabolic index and systolic blood pressure (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with heart failure with reduced ejection fraction and OSA, short-term CPAP increased hydroxyephedrine retention, indicating improved myocardial sympathetic nerve function, but overall did not affect energetics. In those with more severe OSA, CPAP may improve cardiac efficiency. Further outcome-based investigation of the consequences of CPAP is warranted. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00756366.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".