STUDY OBJECTIVES: The clear discrimination of central and obstructive hypopneas is highly relevant to avoid misinterpretation and inappropriate treatment of complicated breathing patterns. Esophageal manometry is the accepted standard for the differentiation of the phenotypes of sleep apnea. However, it is limited in its use due to poor acceptance by patients and therefore rarely performed in routine clinical practice. Flattening of the inspiratory airflow curve, paradoxical breathing, arousal position, sleep stages, and breathing pattern at the end of the hypopnea can each give hints for the classification of hypopnea. The aim of this study was to evaluate a standardized algorithm combining these polysomnographic parameters for the discrimination of hypopneas in everyday practice. METHODS: Polysomnography (PSG) and esophageal manometry were performed in 41 patients suspected of having sleep apnea (33 male, 52.3 ± 15.9 yr, body mass index 28.6 ± 4.5 kg/m(2)). Hypopneas were independently discriminated by blinded investigators based on esophageal pressure and the PSG-based algorithm. Only those hypopneas that could be differentiated with both methods were evaluated. RESULTS: There were 1,175 of 1,837 hypopneas (64%) that could be defined by esophageal pressure, 1,812 (98.6%) by the PSG-based algorithm. Using esophageal pressure as a reference, the new algorithm correctly defined 76.9% of central and 60.5% of obstructive hypopneas. The overall accuracy was 68%. The isolated analysis of single PSG parameters revealed a lower accuracy compared with the combined algorithm. CONCLUSIONS: The PSG-based algorithm allows for discrimination of most hypopneas. It is advantageous in comparison with esophageal pressure because it is noninvasive and less impaired by artefacts. Therefore, it is a potentially helpful tool for sleep specialists. CITATION: Randerath WJ; Treml M; Priegnitz C; Stieglitz S; Hagmeyer L; Morgenstern C. Evaluation of a noninvasive algorithm for differentiation of obstructive and central hypopneas. SLEEP 2013;36(3):363-368.
STUDY OBJECTIVES: The clear discrimination of central and obstructive hypopneas is highly relevant to avoid misinterpretation and inappropriate treatment of complicated breathing patterns. Esophageal manometry is the accepted standard for the differentiation of the phenotypes of sleep apnea. However, it is limited in its use due to poor acceptance by patients and therefore rarely performed in routine clinical practice. Flattening of the inspiratory airflow curve, paradoxical breathing, arousal position, sleep stages, and breathing pattern at the end of the hypopnea can each give hints for the classification of hypopnea. The aim of this study was to evaluate a standardized algorithm combining these polysomnographic parameters for the discrimination of hypopneas in everyday practice. METHODS: Polysomnography (PSG) and esophageal manometry were performed in 41 patients suspected of having sleep apnea (33 male, 52.3 ± 15.9 yr, body mass index 28.6 ± 4.5 kg/m(2)). Hypopneas were independently discriminated by blinded investigators based on esophageal pressure and the PSG-based algorithm. Only those hypopneas that could be differentiated with both methods were evaluated. RESULTS: There were 1,175 of 1,837 hypopneas (64%) that could be defined by esophageal pressure, 1,812 (98.6%) by the PSG-based algorithm. Using esophageal pressure as a reference, the new algorithm correctly defined 76.9% of central and 60.5% of obstructive hypopneas. The overall accuracy was 68%. The isolated analysis of single PSG parameters revealed a lower accuracy compared with the combined algorithm. CONCLUSIONS: The PSG-based algorithm allows for discrimination of most hypopneas. It is advantageous in comparison with esophageal pressure because it is noninvasive and less impaired by artefacts. Therefore, it is a potentially helpful tool for sleep specialists. CITATION: Randerath WJ; Treml M; Priegnitz C; Stieglitz S; Hagmeyer L; Morgenstern C. Evaluation of a noninvasive algorithm for differentiation of obstructive and central hypopneas. SLEEP 2013;36(3):363-368.
Authors: T Hori; Y Sugita; E Koga; S Shirakawa; K Inoue; S Uchida; H Kuwahara; M Kousaka; T Kobayashi; Y Tsuji; M Terashima; K Fukuda; N Fukuda Journal: Psychiatry Clin Neurosci Date: 2001-06 Impact factor: 5.188
Authors: J R Badia; R O Farré; R John Kimoff; E Ballester; L Hernández; M Rotger; D Navajas; J M Montserrat Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 1999-11 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: Xiao Lei Zhang; Hua Ping Dai; Hui Zhang; Bo Gao; Li Zhang; Teng Han; Chen Wang Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2019-10-26 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: Dwayne L Mann; Philip I Terrill; Ali Azarbarzin; Sara Mariani; Angelo Franciosini; Alessandra Camassa; Thomas Georgeson; Melania Marques; Luigi Taranto-Montemurro; Ludovico Messineo; Susan Redline; Andrew Wellman; Scott A Sands Journal: Eur Respir J Date: 2019-07-04 Impact factor: 16.671
Authors: Christoph Fisser; Kristina Götz; Andrea Hetzenecker; Kurt Debl; Florian Zeman; Okka W Hamer; Florian Poschenrieder; Claudia Fellner; Stefan Stadler; Lars S Maier; Michael Pfeifer; Stefan Buchner; Michael Arzt Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2020-06-09 Impact factor: 5.460