• Chinese medical journal · Jun 2009

    Subjective sleepiness in heart failure patients with sleep-related breathing disorder.

    • Han-Qiao Wang, Gang Chen, Jing Li, Shu-Min Hao, Xin-Shun Gu, Jiang-Na Pang, and Xiang-Hua Fu.
    • Sleep Breathing Disorder Department, Third Hospital of Hebei Medical University, Shijiazhuang, Hebei 050017, China.
    • Chin. Med. J. 2009 Jun 20; 122 (12): 1375-9.

    BackgroundPrevious studies show that sleep-related breathing disorder (SRBD) is common in patients with heart failure (HF) and is associated with increased mortality. This study aimed to determine whether there was significant difference of subjective daytime sleepiness between HF patients with and without SRBD.MethodsWe enrolled, prospectively, 195 consecutive HF patients with left ventricular ejection fractions (LVEF) < or = 45% and all subjects underwent polysomnography to measure the sleep structure between 2005 and 2008. Patients were then assigned to those with SRBD including obstructive and central sleep apnea (apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) > or = 5/hour of sleep) and those without SRBD (AHI < 5/hour) according to the sleep study. The subjective sleepiness was assessed with Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS).ResultsAmong 195 HF patients, the prevalence of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) was 53% and of central sleep apnea (CSA) was 27%. There was no significant difference of ESS scores between patients without SRBD (NSA) and with SRBD (NSA vs OSA: 6.7 +/- 0.6 vs 7.6 +/- 0.4, P = 0.105 and NSA vs CSA: 6.7 +/- 0.6 vs 7.4 +/- 0.5, P = 0.235, respectively), indicating that SRBD patients had no more subjective daytime sleepiness. Compared with NSA, patients with SRBD had increased arousal index (ArI) (NSA vs OSA: 14.1 +/- 1.4 vs 26.3 +/- 1.5, P < 0.001 and NSA vs CSA: 14.1 +/- 1.4 vs 31.3 +/- 3.5, P < 0.001, respectively), more awake number after sleep onset (NSA vs OSA: 19.2 +/- 1.5 vs 26.2 +/- 1.4, P = 0.01 and NSA vs CSA: 19.2 +/- 1.5 vs 36.9 +/- 4.4, P < 0.001, respectively), and reduced proportion of slow-wave sleep (SWS) (NSA vs OSA: 13.8 +/- 1.7 vs 9.3 +/- 0.7, P = 0.024 and NSA vs CSA: 13.8 +/- 1.7 vs 8.9 +/- 0.9, P = 0.024, respectively).ConclusionsOSA and CSA remain common in patients with HF on optimal contemporary therapy. Patients with both HF and SRBD have no significant subjective daytime sleepiness compared with patients without SRBD, despite of significantly increased awake number, arousal and decreased proportion of deep sleep stages. It is not a credible way and means to exclude SRBD in patients with HF according to the absence of subjective daytime sleepiness.

      Pubmed     Full text   Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…

Want more great medical articles?

Keep up to date with a free trial of metajournal, personalized for your practice.
1,624,503 articles already indexed!

We guarantee your privacy. Your email address will not be shared.