Comparing treatment effects of a convenient vibratory positional device to CPAP in positional OSA: a crossover randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVES: Up to 77% of patients with obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) have positional OSA (POSA) but traditional positional therapy (PT) methods have failed as they were poorly tolerated. New convenient vibratory PT devices have been invented but while recent studies suggest high treatment efficacy and adherence, there are no published data comparing these devices directly with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). Our objective is to evaluate if a convenient vibratory PT device is non-inferior to CPAP in POSA treatment. METHODS: In this crossover randomised controlled trial, we enrolled patients with POSA with significant daytime sleepiness (Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS)≥10). POSA diagnosis was based on: (1) total Apnoea/Hypopnoea Index (AHI)>10/hour and non-supine AHI<10/hour (2) supine AHI≥2 × non-supine AHI. Patients used their initial allocated devices (PT or CPAP) for 8 weeks before crossing to the alternative intervention after a 1 week washout. The primary aim is to measure changes in ESS between the two treatments. Secondary outcomes include sleep study parameters and patient treatment preference (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT03125512). RESULTS: 40 patients completed the trial between April 2017 and December 2018. Difference in ESS after 8 weeks of device use (PT minus CPAP) was 2.0 (95% CI 0.68 to 3.32), exceeding our predetermined non-inferiority margin of 1.5. AHI on CPAP was lower than with PT (4.0±3.2 vs 13.0±13.8 events/hour, respectively, p=0.001), although both were lower than at baseline. Time spent supine was significantly lower with PT than CPAP (p<0.001). 60% of patients preferred CPAP, 20% preferred PT, while 20% preferred neither device. CONCLUSIONS: The non-inferiority ESS endpoint for PT compared with CPAP was not met and the results were inconclusive. Future trials with larger sample sizes or in less symptomatic patients are warranted to provide further insight into the role of these new vibratory PT devices.

Modafinil improves daytime sleepiness in patients with mild to moderate obstructive sleep apnoea not using standard treatments: a randomised placebo-controlled crossover trial.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with mild to moderate obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) commonly suffer excessive daytime sleepiness. Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) has limited effectiveness in reducing sleepiness in milder OSA. Modafinil is a wake-promoting drug licensed to treat residual sleepiness in CPAP-treated OSA. We hypothesised that modafinil may effectively treat sleepiness in untreated mild to moderate OSA. METHODS: Untreated sleepy men with mild to moderate OSA (age 18-70, apnoea-hypopnoea index (AHI) 5-30/h, Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) ≥10) were randomised to receive 200 mg modafinil or matching placebo daily for 2 weeks before crossing over to the alternative treatment after a minimum 2-week washout. Mixed model analysis of variance was used to compare the changes on modafinil to placebo while classifying all randomised patients as random factors. RESULTS: 32 patients were randomised (mean (SD) AHI 13 (6.4)/h, age 47 (10.7) years, ESS 13.6 (3.3), body mass index 28.2 (3.6) kg/m(2)), 29 of whom (91%) completed the trial. The primary outcome (ESS) improved more on modafinil than placebo (3.6 points, 95% CI 1.3 to 5.8, p=0.003) and the secondary outcome (40-min driving simulator performance) also improved more on modafinil than placebo (steering deviation 4.7 cm, 95% CI 0.8 to 8.5, p=0.018). Psychomotor Vigilance Task reciprocal reaction time improved significantly over placebo (0.15 (1/ms), 95% CI 0.03 to 0.27, p=0.016). Improvements on the Functional Outcomes of Sleep Questionnaire were not significant (5.3 points over placebo, 95% CI -1 to 11.6, p=0.093). CONCLUSIONS: Modafinil significantly improved subjective sleepiness in patients with untreated mild to moderate OSA. The size of this effect is clinically relevant at 3-4 ESS points of improvement compared with only 1-2 points in CPAP clinical trials. Driving simulator performance and reaction time also improved on modafinil. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ACTRN#12608000128392.

Brain function in obstructive sleep apnea: results from the Brain Resource International Database.

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is expected to impair vigilance and executive functioning, owing to the sensitivity of the prefrontal cortex to the effects of sleep fragmentation and intermittent hypoxia. Studies examining the pattern of cognitive dysfunction show variable results, with the heterogeneity in part due to small sample sizes in current studies and little consistency of the tests used. We examined a group of fifty subjects from the Brain Resource International Database (BRID), predicted to have OSA on the basis of the Multivariable Apnea Prediction Index, and compared them with 200 matched controls. On electrophysiological tests, the OSA group showed reduced eyes closed alpha power, increased auditory oddball N100 and P200 amplitude, but reduced N200 and P300 amplitude. The latency to P300 was not significantly different between groups, but latencies to N200 and P200 were prolonged in the OSA group. Performance testing of the executive function found that verbal interference and the switching of attention were impaired in the OSA group. We have demonstrated that a diagnostic algorithm based on apnea symptoms and demographic factors can be used to select a group with likely OSA manifesting deficits in information processing and executive function.