Raphaël Heinzer1, Jonas J Saugy2,3, Thomas Rupp4, Nadia Tobback1, Raphael Faiss2,3, Nicolas Bourdillon2,3, José Haba Rubio1, Grégoire P Millet2,3. 1. Center for Investigation and Research in Sleep, CHUV, Lausanne, Switzerland. 2. ISSUL, Institute of Sport Sciences, Faculty of Biology and Medicine, University of Lausanne, Switzerland. 3. Department of Physiology, Faculty of Biology and Medicine, University of Lausanne, Switzerland. 4. Savoie Mont Blanc University, Exercise Physiology Laboratory, Chambery, France.
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVES: Hypoxia is known to generate sleep-disordered breathing but there is a debate about the pathophysiological responses to two different types of hypoxic exposure: normobaric hypoxia (NH) and hypobaric hypoxia (HH), which have never been directly compared. Our aim was to compare sleep disorders induced by these two types of altitude. METHODS: Subjects were exposed to 26 h of simulated (NH) or real altitude (HH) corresponding to 3,450 m and a control condition (NN) in a randomized order. The sleep assessments were performed with nocturnal polysomnography (PSG) and questionnaires. Thirteen healthy trained males subjects volunteered for this study (mean ± SD; age 34 ± 9 y, body weight 76.2 ± 6.8 kg, height 179.7 ± 4.2 cm). RESULTS:Mean nocturnal oxygen saturation was further decreased during HH than in NH (81.2 ± 3.1 versus 83.6 ± 1.9%; P < 0.01) when compared to NN (95.5 ± 0.9%; P < 0.001). Heart rate was higher in HH than in NH (61 ± 10 versus 55 ± 6 bpm; P < 0.05) and NN (48 ± 5 bpm; P < 0.001). Total sleep time was longer in HH than in NH (351 ± 63 versus 317 ± 65 min, P < 0.05), and both were shorter compared to NN (388 ± 50 min, P < 0.05). Breathing frequency did not differ between conditions. Apnea-hypopnea index was higher in HH than in NH (20.5 [15.8-57.4] versus 11.4 [5.0-65.4]; P < 0.01) and NN (8.2 [3.9-8.8]; P < 0.001). Subjective sleep quality was similar between hypoxic conditions but lower than in NN. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that HH has a greater effect on nocturnal breathing and sleep structure than NH. In HH, we observed more periodic breathing, which might arise from the lower saturation due to hypobaria, but needs to be confirmed.
RCT Entities:
STUDY OBJECTIVES:Hypoxia is known to generate sleep-disordered breathing but there is a debate about the pathophysiological responses to two different types of hypoxic exposure: normobaric hypoxia (NH) and hypobaric hypoxia (HH), which have never been directly compared. Our aim was to compare sleep disorders induced by these two types of altitude. METHODS: Subjects were exposed to 26 h of simulated (NH) or real altitude (HH) corresponding to 3,450 m and a control condition (NN) in a randomized order. The sleep assessments were performed with nocturnal polysomnography (PSG) and questionnaires. Thirteen healthy trained males subjects volunteered for this study (mean ± SD; age 34 ± 9 y, body weight 76.2 ± 6.8 kg, height 179.7 ± 4.2 cm). RESULTS: Mean nocturnal oxygen saturation was further decreased during HH than in NH (81.2 ± 3.1 versus 83.6 ± 1.9%; P < 0.01) when compared to NN (95.5 ± 0.9%; P < 0.001). Heart rate was higher in HH than in NH (61 ± 10 versus 55 ± 6 bpm; P < 0.05) and NN (48 ± 5 bpm; P < 0.001). Total sleep time was longer in HH than in NH (351 ± 63 versus 317 ± 65 min, P < 0.05), and both were shorter compared to NN (388 ± 50 min, P < 0.05). Breathing frequency did not differ between conditions. Apnea-hypopnea index was higher in HH than in NH (20.5 [15.8-57.4] versus 11.4 [5.0-65.4]; P < 0.01) and NN (8.2 [3.9-8.8]; P < 0.001). Subjective sleep quality was similar between hypoxic conditions but lower than in NN. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that HH has a greater effect on nocturnal breathing and sleep structure than NH. In HH, we observed more periodic breathing, which might arise from the lower saturation due to hypobaria, but needs to be confirmed.
Authors: Hugh H K Fullagar; Sabrina Skorski; Rob Duffield; Daniel Hammes; Aaron J Coutts; Tim Meyer Journal: Sports Med Date: 2015-02 Impact factor: 11.136
Authors: A Lovis; M De Riedmatten; D Greiner; G Lecciso; D Andries; U Scherrer; A Wellman; C Sartori; R Heinzer Journal: Sleep Med Date: 2012-04-12 Impact factor: 3.492
Authors: Anna Hauser; Laurent Schmitt; Severin Troesch; Jonas J Saugy; Roberto Cejuela-Anta; Raphael Faiss; Neil Robinson; Jon P Wehrlin; Grégoire P Millet Journal: Med Sci Sports Exerc Date: 2016-04 Impact factor: 5.411
Authors: Samuel J Oliver; Ricardo J S Costa; Stewart J Laing; James L J Bilzon; Neil P Walsh Journal: Eur J Appl Physiol Date: 2009-06-20 Impact factor: 3.078
Authors: Charli Sargent; Walter F Schmidt; Robert J Aughey; Pitre C Bourdon; Rudy Soria; Jesus C Jimenez Claros; Laura A Garvican-Lewis; Martin Buchheit; Ben M Simpson; Kristal Hammond; Marlen Kley; Nadine Wachsmuth; Christopher J Gore; Gregory D Roach Journal: Br J Sports Med Date: 2013-12 Impact factor: 13.800
Authors: Stephan Pramsohler; Robert Schilz; Andreas Patzak; Linda Rausch; Nikolaus C Netzer Journal: Sleep Breath Date: 2019-04-10 Impact factor: 2.816