Management of sleep apnea without high pretest probability or with comorbidities by three nights of portable sleep monitoring.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) diagnosis using simplified methods such as portable sleep monitoring (PM) is only recommended in patients with a high pretest probability. The aim is to determine the diagnostic efficacy, consequent therapeutic decision-making, and costs of OSA diagnosis using polysomnography (PSG) versus three consecutive studies of PM in patients with mild to moderate suspicion of sleep apnea or with comorbidity that can mask OSA symptoms. DESIGN AND SETTING: Randomized, blinded, crossover study of 3 nights of PM (3N-PM) versus PSG. The diagnostic efficacy was evaluated with receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves. Therapeutic decisions to assess concordance between the two different approaches were performed by sleep physicians and respiratory physicians (staff and residents) using agreement level and kappa coefficient. The costs of each diagnostic strategy were considered. PATIENTS AND RESULTS: Fifty-six patients were selected. Epworth Sleepiness Scale was 10.1 (5.3) points. Bland-Altman plot for apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) showed good agreement. ROC curves showed the best area under the curve in patients with PSG AHI ≥ 5 [0.955 (confidence interval = 0.862-0.993)]. For a PSG AHI ≥ 5, a PM AHI of 5 would effectively exclude and confirm OSA diagnosis. For a PSG AHI ≥ 15, a PM AHI ≥ 22 would confirm and PM AHI < 7 would exclude OSA. The best agreement of therapeutic decisions was achieved by the sleep medicine specialists (81.8%). The best cost-diagnostic efficacy was obtained by the 3N-PM. CONCLUSIONS: Three consecutive nights of portable monitoring at home evaluated by a qualified sleep specialist is useful for the management of patients without high pretest probability of obstructive sleep apnea or with comorbidities. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov, registration number: NCT01820156. CITATION: Guerrero A, Embid C, Isetta V, Farre R, Duran-Cantolla J, Parra O, Barbé F, Montserrat JM, Masa JF. Management of sleep apnea without high pretest probability or with comorbidities by three nights of portable sleep monitoring.

Automatic CPAP performance in patients with sleep apnea plus COPD.

BACKGROUND: Automatic CPAP devices have demonstrated good results in obtaining optimal fixed CPAP pressure to eliminate respiratory events in patients with sleep apnea-hypopnea syndrome (SAHS). However, automatic CPAP has not been fully studied in patients with COPD plus SAHS. OBJECTIVES: To analyse the performance of an automatic CPAP in severe COPD patients compared with SAHS patients with no associated co-morbidity. METHODS: We compared 10 consecutive patients with SAHS and no associated co-morbidity and 10 patients with SAHS plus severe COPD who required CPAP titration. Automatic CPAP performance was studied during full-night PSG. Inadequate pressure increase periods, absence of pressure increases in reaction to respiratory events, air leak periods, and pressure behaviour in the face of erratic breathing periods were analysed. RESULTS: The SAHS patients without co-morbidities vs. SAHS plus COPD patients presented: mean sleep efficiency, 80.2 (11.5)% vs. 76.5 (12.1)%; residual AHI, 6.3 (5.2) vs. 5.1 (7.7); residual CT90, 1 (3)% vs. 14 (1)%. The device´s performance demonstrates a mean of 1.2 (1.5) vs. 1.3 (1.2) periods of inadequate pressure increases; absence of pressure increases in reaction to respiratory events, 4.1 (5.4) vs. 0.6 (0.7) times; periods of air leaks, 1.3 (3.8) vs. 13.9 (11.7); mean optimal pressure, 9.1 (1.4) vs. 9.0 (1.9) cm H(2)O. CONCLUSION: Titration with automatic CPAP could be as effective in patients with SAHS plus severe COPD as in patients with SAHS without COPD. However, the presence of more leakages must be taken into account.

Sleep breathing flow characteristics as a sign for the detection of wakefulness in patients with sleep apnea.

BACKGROUND: To improve the performance of simplified sleep studies, it is essential to properly estimate the sleep time. OBJECTIVES: Our aim is to estimate sleep efficiency on the basis of flow breathing signal characteristics. METHODS: Twenty subjects with sleep apnea-hypopnea syndrome diagnosed by polysomnography were studied. A characteristic pattern of flow signal defined our criteria for wakefulness and sleep. Sleep was analyzed in 2 different runs: (1) in the usual manner (neurological and respiratory variables), and (2) only the nasal cannula flow signal was displayed on the computer screen and the sleep and wakefulness periods were scored according to our criteria. At the end of the scoring process, all the signals were displayed on the screen to analyze the concordance. RESULTS: Three thousand and sixty-nine screens were analyzed. The polysomnography sleep efficiency measured was 80.8%. The estimated sleep efficiency measured by nasal prongs was 78.9%. The detection and concordance of wakefulness had a sensitivity of 58.7%, a specificity of 96.4%, a positive predictive value of 81.3% and a negative predictive value of 89.6%. CONCLUSIONS: Our criteria for sleep and wakefulness based on airflow waveform morphology are a helpful parameter for estimating sleep efficiency in a simplified sleep study.