PURPOSE:Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is the therapy of choice for the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Not all patients can use CPAP therapy with adequate compliance. There is a need to develop more comfortable modes. Auto bi-level Pressure Relief-Positive Airway Pressure (ABPR-PAP) can be an alternative. We conducted a prospective double-blind, randomised trial to evaluate the efficacy and compliance of ABPR-PAP compared with CPAP in OSA patients. METHODS: We included 35 CPAP naive patients (age 53.3 ± 10.3 years, BMI 31.0 ± 5.0 kg/m(2), ESS 10.0 ± 4.2) diagnosed with moderate to severe OSA who underwent a successful CPAP titration. Patients were randomised into the CPAP or the ABPR-PAP treatment group. We used the same device (BIPAP® Auto, Philips Respironics) for CPAP or ABPR-PAP. Apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) was determined using polysomnography before (AHI 40.6 ± 18.3 per hour) and after treatment. RESULTS: Eighteen patients received CPAP and the remaining 17 received APBR-PAP. Groups were similar in terms of demographics and OSA severity. There were no serious adverse events during the trial. CPAP was fixed by a sleep expert and ABPR-PAP varied (range 5-15 cmH(2)O). AHI decreased in the CPAP group to 6.4 ± 5.7 per hour and in the ABPR-PAP group to 4.8 ± 3.6 per hour in the first night (N = 35). After 3 months, the AHI decreased in the CPAP group to 4.4 ± 5.3 per hour and in the ABPR-PAP group to 2.6 ± 3.8 per hour (N = 32). Differences between the groups were not statistically significant. There were no differences in compliance. CONCLUSIONS:ABPR-PAP is a promising new ventilation mode that enables effective treatment of OSA patients.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is the therapy of choice for the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Not all patients can use CPAP therapy with adequate compliance. There is a need to develop more comfortable modes. Auto bi-level Pressure Relief-Positive Airway Pressure (ABPR-PAP) can be an alternative. We conducted a prospective double-blind, randomised trial to evaluate the efficacy and compliance of ABPR-PAP compared with CPAP in OSA patients. METHODS: We included 35 CPAP naive patients (age 53.3 ± 10.3 years, BMI 31.0 ± 5.0 kg/m(2), ESS 10.0 ± 4.2) diagnosed with moderate to severe OSA who underwent a successful CPAP titration. Patients were randomised into the CPAP or the ABPR-PAP treatment group. We used the same device (BIPAP® Auto, Philips Respironics) for CPAP or ABPR-PAP. Apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) was determined using polysomnography before (AHI 40.6 ± 18.3 per hour) and after treatment. RESULTS: Eighteen patients received CPAP and the remaining 17 received APBR-PAP. Groups were similar in terms of demographics and OSA severity. There were no serious adverse events during the trial. CPAP was fixed by a sleep expert and ABPR-PAP varied (range 5-15 cmH(2)O). AHI decreased in the CPAP group to 6.4 ± 5.7 per hour and in the ABPR-PAP group to 4.8 ± 3.6 per hour in the first night (N = 35). After 3 months, the AHI decreased in the CPAP group to 4.4 ± 5.3 per hour and in the ABPR-PAP group to 2.6 ± 3.8 per hour (N = 32). Differences between the groups were not statistically significant. There were no differences in compliance. CONCLUSIONS: ABPR-PAP is a promising new ventilation mode that enables effective treatment of OSA patients.
Authors: Ingo Fietze; Martin Glos; Isabel Moebus; Christian Witt; Thomas Penzel; Gert Baumann Journal: Respiration Date: 2007-02-23 Impact factor: 3.580
Authors: Clete A Kushida; Deborah A Nichols; Stuart F Quan; James L Goodwin; David P White; Daniel J Gottlieb; James K Walsh; Paula K Schweitzer; Christian Guilleminault; Richard D Simon; Eileen B Leary; Pamela R Hyde; Tyson H Holmes; Daniel A Bloch; Sylvan Green; Linda K McEvoy; Alan Gevins; William C Dement Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2006-07-15 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: Heidi Danker-Hopfe; D Kunz; G Gruber; G Klösch; J L Lorenzo; S L Himanen; B Kemp; T Penzel; J Röschke; H Dorn; A Schlögl; E Trenker; G Dorffner Journal: J Sleep Res Date: 2004-03 Impact factor: 3.981
Authors: Clete A Kushida; Michael R Littner; Max Hirshkowitz; Timothy I Morgenthaler; Cathy A Alessi; Dennis Bailey; Brian Boehlecke; Terry M Brown; Jack Coleman; Leah Friedman; Sheldon Kapen; Vishesh K Kapur; Milton Kramer; Teofilo Lee-Chiong; Judith Owens; Jeffrey P Pancer; Todd J Swick; Merrill S Wise Journal: Sleep Date: 2006-03 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: Susheel P Patil; Indu A Ayappa; Sean M Caples; R Joh Kimoff; Sanjay R Patel; Christopher G Harrod Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2019-02-15 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: Ian M Colrain; Jed Black; Lawrence C Siegel; Richard K Bogan; Philip M Becker; Mehran Farid-Moayer; Rochelle Goldberg; D Alan Lankford; Andrew N Goldberg; Atul Malhotra Journal: Sleep Med Date: 2013-07-17 Impact factor: 3.492