Ghada Bourjeily1, Jennifer Y Fung2, Katherine M Sharkey3, Palak Walia4, Mary Kao4, Robin Moore5, Susan Martin6, Christina A Raker7, Richard P Millman3. 1. The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, USA; Department of Medicine, The Miriam Hospital, Providence, RI, USA; Department of Medicine, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, RI, USA. Electronic address: Ghada_Bourjeily@Brown.edu. 2. Mount Sinai Hospital Pulmonary Fellowship Program, New York, NY, USA. 3. The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, USA; Department of Medicine, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, RI, USA. 4. The Warren Alpert Medical School of Brown University, Providence, RI, USA. 5. Department of Medicine, Rhode Island Hospital, Providence, RI, USA. 6. Department of Medicine, The Miriam Hospital, Providence, RI, USA. 7. Women and Infants Hospital of Rhode Island, Division of Research, Providence, RI, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Pregnancy physiology may predispose women to the development of airflow limitations during sleep. The goal of this study was to evaluate whether pregnant women suspected of sleep-disordered breathing (SDB) are more likely to have airflow limitations compared to non-pregnant controls. METHODS: We recruited pregnant women referred for polysomnography for a diagnosis of SDB. Non-pregnant female controls matched for age, body mass index (BMI), and apnoea-hypopnoea index (AHI) were identified from a database. We examined airflow tracings for changes in amplitude and shape. We classified airflow limitation by (a) amplitude criteria defined as decreased airflow of > or =10 s without desaturation or arousal (FL 10), or decreased airflow of any duration combined with either 1-2% desaturation or arousal, (FL 1-2%); and (b) shape criteria defined as the presence of flattening or oscillations of the inspiratory flow curve. RESULTS: We identified 25 case-control pairs. Mean BMI was 44.0±6.9 in cases and 44.1±7.3 in controls. Using shape criteria, pregnant women had significantly more flow-limited breaths throughout total sleep time (32.4±35.8 vs. 9.4±17.9, p<0.0001) and in each stage of sleep (p<0.0001) than non-pregnant controls. In a subgroup analysis, pregnant women without a diagnosis of obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) who had an AHI <5 had similar findings (p<0.0001). There was no difference in airflow limitation by amplitude criteria between pregnant women and controls (p=0.22). CONCLUSIONS: Pregnant women suspected of OSA have more frequent shape-defined airflow limitations than non-pregnant controls, even when they do not meet polysomnographic OSA criteria.
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Pregnancy physiology may predispose women to the development of airflow limitations during sleep. The goal of this study was to evaluate whether pregnant women suspected of sleep-disordered breathing (SDB) are more likely to have airflow limitations compared to non-pregnant controls. METHODS: We recruited pregnant women referred for polysomnography for a diagnosis of SDB. Non-pregnant female controls matched for age, body mass index (BMI), and apnoea-hypopnoea index (AHI) were identified from a database. We examined airflow tracings for changes in amplitude and shape. We classified airflow limitation by (a) amplitude criteria defined as decreased airflow of > or =10 s without desaturation or arousal (FL 10), or decreased airflow of any duration combined with either 1-2% desaturation or arousal, (FL 1-2%); and (b) shape criteria defined as the presence of flattening or oscillations of the inspiratory flow curve. RESULTS: We identified 25 case-control pairs. Mean BMI was 44.0±6.9 in cases and 44.1±7.3 in controls. Using shape criteria, pregnant women had significantly more flow-limited breaths throughout total sleep time (32.4±35.8 vs. 9.4±17.9, p<0.0001) and in each stage of sleep (p<0.0001) than non-pregnant controls. In a subgroup analysis, pregnant women without a diagnosis of obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) who had an AHI <5 had similar findings (p<0.0001). There was no difference in airflow limitation by amplitude criteria between pregnant women and controls (p=0.22). CONCLUSIONS: Pregnant women suspected of OSA have more frequent shape-defined airflow limitations than non-pregnant controls, even when they do not meet polysomnographic OSA criteria.
Authors: Sushmita Pamidi; Susan Redline; David Rapoport; Indu Ayappa; Luciana Palombini; Ramon Farre; Jason Kirkness; Jean-Louis Pépin; Olli Polo; Andrew Wellman; R John Kimoff Journal: Ann Am Thorac Soc Date: 2017-07
Authors: Brittany N Link; Celine Eid; Maggie H Bublitz; Martino F Pengo; Myriam Salameh; Karin S Ludwig; Richard P Millman; Lance Dworkin; Ghada Bourjeily Journal: Sleep Date: 2019-05-01 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: Laura Sanapo; Margaret H Bublitz; Alice Bai; Niharika Mehta; Geralyn M Messerlian; Patrick Catalano; Ghada Bourjeily Journal: Sleep Date: 2022-04-11 Impact factor: 6.313
Authors: Margaret H Bublitz; Joao Filipe Monteiro; Andrew Caraganis; Susan Martin; Jeffrey Parker; Lucia Larson; Margaret A Miller; Ghada Bourjeily Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2018-01-15 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: Margaret H Bublitz; Meghan Sharp; Taylor Freeburg; Laura Sanapo; Nicole R Nugent; Katherine Sharkey; Ghada Bourjeily Journal: Diagnostics (Basel) Date: 2021-05-11
Authors: Alex Hincker; Jacob Nadler; Suzanne Karan; Ebony Carter; Shay Porat; Barbara Warner; Yo-El S Ju; Arbi Ben Abdallah; Elizabeth Wilson; Ellen M Lockhart; Yehuda Ginosar Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2021-06-29 Impact factor: 2.692