Qing Yun Li1,2, Richard B Berry3, Mark G Goetting4, Bethany Staley2, Haideliza Soto-Calderon2, Sheila C Tsai5, Jeffrey G Jasko6, Allan I Pack2, Samuel T Kuna2,7. 1. Department of Respiratory Medicine, Ruijin Hospital, Shanghai Jiao Tong University School of Medicine, Shanghai, China. 2. Department of Medicine, Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, PA. 3. Department of Medicine, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL. 4. Bronson Sleep Health, Kalamazoo, MI. 5. Department of Medicine, National Jewish Health, Denver, CO. 6. Philips Respironics, Inc., Monroeville, PA. 7. Department of Medicine, Philadelphia Veterans Affairs Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA.
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVES: To compare a positive airway pressure (PAP) device's detection of respiratory events and airway status during device-detected apneas with events scored on simultaneous polysomnography (PSG). DESIGN: Prospective PSGs of patients with sleep apnea using a new-generation PAP device. SETTINGS: Four clinical and academic sleep centers. PATIENTS: Forty-five patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and complex sleep apnea (Comp SA) performed a PSG on PAP levels adjusted to induce respiratory events. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: PAP device data identifying the type of respiratory event and whether the airway during a device-detected apnea was open or obstructed were compared to time-synced, manually scored respiratory events on simultaneous PSG recording. Intraclass correlation coefficients between device-detected and PSG scored events were 0.854 for apnea-hypopnea index (AHI), 0.783 for apnea index, 0.252 for hypopnea index, and 0.098 for respiratory event-related arousals index. At a device AHI (AHIFlow) of 10 events/h, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.98, with sensitivity 0.92 and specificity 0.84. AHIFlow tended to overestimate AHI on PSG at values less than 10 events/h. The device detected that the airway was obstructed in 87.4% of manually scored obstructive apneas. Of the device-detected apneas with clear airway, a minority (15.8%) were manually scored as obstructive apneas. CONCLUSIONS: A device-detected apnea-hypopnea index (AHIFlow) < 10 events/h on a positive airway pressure device is strong evidence of good treatment efficacy. Device-detected airway status agrees closely with the presumed airway status during polysomnography scored events, but should not be equated with a specific type of respiratory event.
STUDY OBJECTIVES: To compare a positive airway pressure (PAP) device's detection of respiratory events and airway status during device-detected apneas with events scored on simultaneous polysomnography (PSG). DESIGN: Prospective PSGs of patients with sleep apnea using a new-generation PAP device. SETTINGS: Four clinical and academic sleep centers. PATIENTS: Forty-five patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and complex sleep apnea (Comp SA) performed a PSG on PAP levels adjusted to induce respiratory events. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: PAP device data identifying the type of respiratory event and whether the airway during a device-detected apnea was open or obstructed were compared to time-synced, manually scored respiratory events on simultaneous PSG recording. Intraclass correlation coefficients between device-detected and PSG scored events were 0.854 for apnea-hypopnea index (AHI), 0.783 for apnea index, 0.252 for hypopnea index, and 0.098 for respiratory event-related arousals index. At a device AHI (AHIFlow) of 10 events/h, area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.98, with sensitivity 0.92 and specificity 0.84. AHIFlow tended to overestimate AHI on PSG at values less than 10 events/h. The device detected that the airway was obstructed in 87.4% of manually scored obstructive apneas. Of the device-detected apneas with clear airway, a minority (15.8%) were manually scored as obstructive apneas. CONCLUSIONS: A device-detected apnea-hypopnea index (AHIFlow) < 10 events/h on a positive airway pressure device is strong evidence of good treatment efficacy. Device-detected airway status agrees closely with the presumed airway status during polysomnography scored events, but should not be equated with a specific type of respiratory event.
Authors: Richard J Schwab; Safwan M Badr; Lawrence J Epstein; Peter C Gay; David Gozal; Malcolm Kohler; Patrick Lévy; Atul Malhotra; Barbara A Phillips; Ilene M Rosen; Kingman P Strohl; Patrick J Strollo; Edward M Weaver; Terri E Weaver Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2013-09-01 Impact factor: 21.405
Authors: R Nisha Aurora; Susmita Chowdhuri; Kannan Ramar; Sabin R Bista; Kenneth R Casey; Carin I Lamm; David A Kristo; Jorge M Mallea; James A Rowley; Rochelle S Zak; Sharon L Tracy Journal: Sleep Date: 2012-01-01 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: Marcel A Baltzan; Ibrahim Kassissia; Osama Elkholi; Mark Palayew; Richard Dabrusin; Norman Wolkove Journal: Sleep Date: 2006-04 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: Stephen D Pittman; Giora Pillar; Richard B Berry; Atul Malhotra; Mary M MacDonald; David P White Journal: Sleep Breath Date: 2006-09 Impact factor: 2.816
Authors: Brian W Locke; Sarah E Neill; Heather E Howe; Michael C Crotty; Jaewhan Kim; Krishna M Sundar Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2022-03-01 Impact factor: 4.062