Muscle atonia index during multiple sleep latency test: A possible marker to differentiate narcolepsy from other hypersomnias.

OBJECTIVE: The complexity and delay of the diagnosis of narcolepsy require several diagnostic tests and invasive procedures such as lumbar puncture. Our study aimed to determine the changes in muscle tone (atonia index, AI) at different levels of vigilance during the entire multiple sleep latency test (MSLT) and each nap in people with narcolepsy type 1 (NT1) and 2 (NT2) compared with other hypersomnias and its potential diagnostic value. METHODS: Twenty-nine patients with NT1 (11 M 18F, mean age 34.9 years, SD 16.8) and sixteen with NT2 (10 M 6F, mean age 39 years, SD 11.8) and 20 controls with other hypersomnias (10 M, 10F mean age 45.1 years, SD 15.1) were recruited. AI was evaluated at different levels of vigilance (Wake and REM sleep) in each nap and throughout the MSLT of each group. The validity of AI in identifying patients with narcolepsy (NT1 and NT2) was analyzed using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. RESULTS: AI during wakefulness (WAI) was significantly higher in the narcolepsy groups (NT1 and NT2 p < 0.001) compared to the hypersomniac group. AI during REM sleep (RAI) (p = 0.03) and WAI in nap with sudden onsets of REM sleep periods (SOREMP) (p = 0.001) were lower in NT1 than in NT2. The ROC curves showed high AUC values for WAI (NT1 0.88; Best Cut-off > 0.57, Sensitivity 79.3 % Specificity 90 %; NT2 0.89 Best Cut-off > 0.67 Sensitivity 87.5 % Specificity 95 %; NT1 and NT2 0.88 Best Cut-off > 0.57 Sensitivity 82.2 % Specificity 90 %) in discriminating subjects suffering from other hypersomnias. RAI and WAI in nap with SOREMP showed a poor AUC value (RAI AUC: 0.7 Best cutoff 0.7 Sensitivity 50 % Specificity 87.5 %; WAI in nap before SOREMP AUC: 0.66, Best cut-off < 0.82 sensitivity 61.9 % and specificity 67.35 %) differentiating NT1 and NT2. CONCLUSIONS: WAI may represent an encouraging electrophysiological marker of narcolepsy and suggests a vulnerable tendency to dissociative wake / sleep dysregulation lacking in other forms of hypersomnia. SIGNIFICANCE: AI during wakefulness may help distinguish between narcolepsy and other hypersomnias.

Sleep disorders in myotonic dystrophy type 2: a controlled polysomnographic study and self-reported questionnaires.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: There is a paucity of data available regarding the occurrence of sleep disorders in myotonic dystrophy type 2 (DM2). In this study the sleep-wake cycle and daytime sleepiness were investigated in DM2 patients and compared with results from healthy subjects and myotonic dystrophy type 1 (DM1) patients. METHODS: Twelve DM2 outpatients, 12 age- and sex-matched healthy controls and 18 DM1 patients were recruited. Subjective quality of sleep was assessed by means of the Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI). Both the Epworth Sleepiness Scale and the Daytime Sleepiness Scale were performed in order to evaluate excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS). All participants underwent polysomnographic monitoring over 48 h as well as the Multiple Sleep Latency Test. RESULTS: Sleep efficiency was < 90% in 12/12 DM2 patients, and significantly reduced when compared with controls or with DM1. Decreased sleep efficiency was associated with sleep-disordered breathing in seven out of 12 DM2 patients and/or periodic limbs movements of sleep (PLMS) in three out of eight patients. Six DM2 patients showed REM sleep without atonia, whereas none of the controls or DM1 patients showed REM sleep dysregulation. The global PSQI score was higher in DM2 patients than in controls and DM1 patients. CONCLUSIONS: Sleep quality in DM2 patients is poorer than in DM1 patients and controls. Sleep apnea is the most common sleep disorder in DM2 patients. Obstructive sleep apnea and sleep fragmentation may represent the main cause of EDS, whereas PLMS is a frequent finding in DM1.