Back

CPAP/BiPAP Compliance Improves Survival in LVAD Recipients with Obstructive Sleep Apnea

Carlquist, J.; Scott, S. S.; Wright, J. C.; Jianing, M.; Peng, J.; Mokadam, N. A.; Whitson, B. A.; Smith, S.

2026-04-22 cardiovascular medicine
10.64898/2026.04.20.26351345 medRxiv
Show abstract

PurposeObstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a common comorbidity in heart failure (HF) patients with prevalence increasing as HF severity worsens. While CPAP/BiPAP has been shown to reduce disease burden and mortality in the general HF population, it is unclear whether these benefits extend to patients with left ventricular assist devices (LVADs). We sought to determine whether OSA affects long-term survival in newly implanted LVAD patients and whether CPAP/BiPAP treatment confers mortality benefits. MethodsThis single-center retrospective study included patients who underwent LVAD implantation between January 2007 and February 2022. Recipients were stratified by OSA status (OSA vs No-OSA), and those with OSA were further categorized based on CPAP/BiPAP compliance. Comparative statistics and Kaplan-Meier survival analyses were performed, with log-rank tests used to compare groups and assess survival differences. A Cox proportional hazards model was conducted to evaluate the association between risk factors and survival among patients with OSA and No-OSA. ResultsBefore LVAD implantation, patients with OSA had higher body mass index, hypertension, and a higher rate of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator placement than those without OSA. OSA was not associated with increased postoperative complications. Although survival did not differ significantly between OSA and No-OSA patients (p=0.33), CPAP/BiPAP-compliant OSA patients had significantly better survival than noncompliant patients (p=0.0099). ConclusionsLVAD patients with OSA who consistently use CPAP/BiPAP have better survival than those who do not. CPAP/BiPAP is a simple, low-risk treatment that can reduce mortality in this population. Therefore, increased perioperative screening for OSA should be considered for patients receiving LVADs. Multicenter studies are needed to confirm our findings further.

Matching journals

The top 6 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 17%
10.4%
2
Heart Rhythm
22 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.1%
3
The American Journal of Cardiology
15 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
10.1%
4
Frontiers in Physiology
93 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
6.8%
5
BMC Cardiovascular Disorders
14 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
6.4%
6
Journal of Clinical Medicine
91 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
6.3%
50% of probability mass above
7
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 24%
4.8%
8
Open Heart
19 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
3.9%
9
Circulation: Heart Failure
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.6%
10
Journal of the American Heart Association
119 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.1%
11
American Journal of Physiology-Heart and Circulatory Physiology
32 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
2.4%
12
Frontiers in Cardiovascular Medicine
49 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.9%
13
Heart
10 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.7%
14
JMIR Formative Research
32 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
1.7%
15
European Journal of Preventive Cardiology
13 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
1.7%
16
International Journal of Cardiology
13 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.7%
17
Cureus
67 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.5%
18
The Journal of Heart and Lung Transplantation
10 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.3%
19
Computers in Biology and Medicine
120 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.1%
20
Physiological Measurement
12 papers in training set
Top 0.4%
0.7%
21
British Journal of Anaesthesia
14 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.7%
22
European Heart Journal
16 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.7%
23
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 35%
0.7%
24
Medicine
30 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.6%
25
American Journal of Respiratory Cell and Molecular Biology
38 papers in training set
Top 0.8%
0.6%