Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
1.
Sleep Breath ; 19(4): 1285-92, 2015 Dec.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25813356

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Opioid treatment of non-malignant chronic pain can result in hypoxemia, hypercarbia, and central sleep apnea. The aim of this study was to determine the initial efficacy of auto servo-ventilation (ASV) and after 3 months of home use. METHODS: This prospective multicenter interventional study recruited chronic pain patients prescribed ≥100 morphine equivalents for at least 4 months. PARTICIPANTS: Following full-night polysomnography (PSG) to confirm the presence of sleep-disordered breathing, patients were randomized to three additional full-night-attended PSGs with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), ASV, and servo-ventilation with an initial mandatory pressure support of 6 cm H2O (ASV manual PSmin 6). Following the PSGs, patients were sent home with EncoreAnywhere and ASV with or without mandatory pressure support. RESULTS: Based on the initial PSG studies, CPAP improved but did not normalize the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI), central apnea index (CAI), or hypopnea index (HI), as all remained elevated. Clinically significant reductions were noted after just one night of ASV and ASV manual (PSmin 6). After 3 months of ASV home use, the AHI, CAI, and obstructive apnea index (OAI) were significantly reduced when compared to baseline diagnostic levels and even when compared to respiratory disturbance indices with CPAP treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Initial and home use of ASV for 3 months resulted in significantly lower AHI, CAI, and OAI. This reduction attests to the efficacy of ASV treatment in chronic pain patients on high doses of opioids.


Asunto(s)
Analgésicos Opioides/efectos adversos , Dolor Crónico/tratamiento farmacológico , Servicios de Atención a Domicilio Provisto por Hospital , Respiración con Presión Positiva/métodos , Apnea Central del Sueño/inducido químicamente , Apnea Central del Sueño/terapia , Adulto , Anciano , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapéutico , Dolor Crónico/diagnóstico , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Polisomnografía/efectos de los fármacos , Respiración con Presión Positiva/instrumentación , Estudios Prospectivos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Adulto Joven
2.
J Clin Sleep Med ; 15(7): 947-956, 2019 07 15.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31383231

RESUMEN

STUDY OBJECTIVES: Compare treatment efficacy and objective adherence between the NightBalance sleep position treatment (SPT) device and auto-adjusting positive airway pressure (APAP) in patients with exclusive positional obstructive sleep apnea (ePOSA) defined as a supine apnea-hypopnea index (sAHI) ≥ 2 times the nonsupine AHI (nsAHI) and a nsAHI < 10 events/h. METHODS: This prospective multicenter randomized crossover trial enrolled treatment naive participants with ePOSA (AHI ≥ 15 events/h and nsAHI < 10 events/h) or (AHI > 10 and < 15 events/h with daytime sleepiness and nsAH < 5 events/h). Polysomnography and objective adherence determination (device data) were performed at the end of each 6-week treatment. Patient device preference was determined at the end of the study. RESULTS: A total of 117 participants were randomized (58 SPT first, 59 APAP first). Of these, 112 started treatment with the second device (adherence cohort) and 110 completed the study (AHI cohort). The AHI on SPT was higher (mean ± standard deviation, 7.29 ± 6.8 versus 3.71 ± 5.1 events/h, P < .001). The mean AHI difference (SPT-APAP) was 3.58 events/h with a one sided 95% confidence interval upper bound of 4.96 events/h (< the prestudy noninferiority margin of 5 events/h). The average nightly adherence (all nights) was greater on SPT (345.3 ± 111.22 versus 286.98 ± 128.9 minutes, P < .0001). Participants found the SPT to be more comfortable and easier to use and 53% reported a preference for SPT assuming both devices were equally effective. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with SPT resulted in non-inferior treatment efficacy and greater adherence compared to APAP in ePOSA suggesting that SPT is an effective treatment for this group. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registry: ClinicalTrials.gov; Title: The POSAtive Study: Study for the Treatment of Positional Obstructive Sleep Apnea; Identifier: NCT03061071; URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03061071.


Asunto(s)
Presión de las Vías Aéreas Positiva Contínua/métodos , Cooperación del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Posicionamiento del Paciente/instrumentación , Prioridad del Paciente/estadística & datos numéricos , Postura , Apnea Obstructiva del Sueño/terapia , Estudios de Cohortes , Estudios Cruzados , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Posicionamiento del Paciente/métodos , Polisomnografía , Estudios Prospectivos , Resultado del Tratamiento
3.
Sleep ; 39(7): 1379-87, 2016 Jul 01.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27166238

RESUMEN

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of oral JZP-110, a second-generation wake-promoting agent with dopaminergic and noradrenergic activity, for treatment of impaired wakefulness and excessive sleepiness in adults with narcolepsy. METHODS: This was a phase 2b, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, parallel-group trial conducted at 28 centers in the United States. Patients were adults with narcolepsy who had baseline scores ≥ 10 on the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) and baseline sleep latency ≤ 10 min on the Maintenance of Wakefulness Test (MWT). Patients received a daily placebo (n = 49) or JZP-110 (n = 44) 150 mg/day weeks 1-4 and 300 mg/day weeks 5-12. Primary efficacy endpoints were change from baseline in average MWT sleep latency, and the Clinical Global Impression-Change (CGI-C); secondary endpoints were change from baseline in ESS score and Patient Global Impression-Change. RESULTS: Improvements were significantly greater with JZP-110 versus placebo on mean MWT sleep latency (4 w, 9.5 versus 1.4 min, P < 0.0001; 12 w, 12.8 versus 2.1 min, P < 0.0001), percentage of patients with CGI-C improvement (4 w, 80% versus 51%, P = 0.0066; 12 w, 86% versus 38%, P < 0.0001), and mean change in ESS (4 w, -5.6 versus -2.4, P = 0.0038; 12 w, -8.5 versus -2.5, P < 0.0001). Three JZP-110-treated patients (6.8%) discontinued due to adverse events (AEs). The most common AEs with JZP-110 versus placebo were insomnia (23% versus 8%), headache (16% versus 10%), nausea (14% versus 6%), diarrhea (11% versus 6%), decreased appetite (14% versus 0%), and anxiety (11% versus 0%). CONCLUSIONS: At doses of 150-300 mg/day, JZP-110 was well tolerated and significantly improved the ability to stay awake and subjective symptoms of excessive sleepiness in adults with narcolepsy. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT01681121.


Asunto(s)
Carbamatos/uso terapéutico , Narcolepsia/tratamiento farmacológico , Fenilalanina/análogos & derivados , Promotores de la Vigilia/uso terapéutico , Adulto , Anciano , Carbamatos/farmacología , Método Doble Ciego , Esquema de Medicación , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Narcolepsia/fisiopatología , Fenilalanina/farmacología , Fenilalanina/uso terapéutico , Fases del Sueño/efectos de los fármacos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Vigilia/efectos de los fármacos , Promotores de la Vigilia/farmacología
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA