Ricardo L M Duarte1,2, Bruno A Mendes3, Tiago S Oliveira-E-Sá3,4, Flavio J Magalhães-da-Silveira5, David Gozal6. 1. SleepLab, Laboratório de Estudo dos Distúrbios do Sono, Centro Médico BarraShopping, Avenida das Américas 4666, sala 309, Barra da Tijuca, Rio de Janeiro, 22649-900, Brazil. rlmduarte@gmail.com. 2. Instituto de Doenças do Tórax, Universidade Federal do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. rlmduarte@gmail.com. 3. Hospital de Santa Marta, Centro Hospitalar Universitário Lisboa Central, Lisbon, Portugal. 4. NOVA Medical School, Faculdade de Ciências Médicas, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Lisbon, Portugal. 5. SleepLab, Laboratório de Estudo dos Distúrbios do Sono, Centro Médico BarraShopping, Avenida das Américas 4666, sala 309, Barra da Tijuca, Rio de Janeiro, 22649-900, Brazil. 6. Department of Child Health, University of Missouri School of Medicine, Columbia, USA.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Mask type (nasal versus oronasal) can affect the optimal pressure required to correct the apnea/hypopnea index (AHI) in obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) subjects treated with CPAP. Our objective was to evaluate if mask type influenced CPAP titration outcomes in OSA patients. METHODS: A retrospective study of individuals with a baseline AHI ≥ 15.0/h, who received an auto-adjusting CPAP titrating device (S9 AutoSet ResMed®) in a sleep-lab setting. The mask type oronasal (OM) or nasal (NM) was always selected by the patients. Optimal pressure requirements, leak, and residual AHI were compared based on mask type. RESULTS: Overall, 436 patients were included: 283 with NM (64.9%) and 153 with OM (35.1%). At baseline, NM and OM cohorts had similar AHI (p = 0.160). Patients allocated to the OM cohort had a higher 95th percentile pressure, a higher 95th percentile leak, and a higher residual AHI than those with a NM: pressure requirement: 12.9 cm H2O (IQR: 10.6-15.0) versus 10.7 cm H2O (IQR: 9.2-12.3); leak: 21.6 L/min (IQR: 9.6-37.2) versus 9.6 L/min (IQR: 3.6-19.2); and residual AHI: 4.9/h (IQR: 2.4-10.2) versus 2.2/h (IQR: 1.0-4.4), respectively (p < 0.001 for all). CONCLUSIONS: CPAP mask type based on individual preferences exerts profound effects on optimal CPAP pressures and efficacy. Patients titrated with OM showed higher pressure requirements, had higher a leak, and higher residual AHI when compared to NM, which may adversely impact treatment adherence and other health outcomes.
PURPOSE: Mask type (nasal versus oronasal) can affect the optimal pressure required to correct the apnea/hypopnea index (AHI) in obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) subjects treated with CPAP. Our objective was to evaluate if mask type influenced CPAP titration outcomes in OSA patients. METHODS: A retrospective study of individuals with a baseline AHI ≥ 15.0/h, who received an auto-adjusting CPAP titrating device (S9 AutoSet ResMed®) in a sleep-lab setting. The mask type oronasal (OM) or nasal (NM) was always selected by the patients. Optimal pressure requirements, leak, and residual AHI were compared based on mask type. RESULTS: Overall, 436 patients were included: 283 with NM (64.9%) and 153 with OM (35.1%). At baseline, NM and OM cohorts had similar AHI (p = 0.160). Patients allocated to the OM cohort had a higher 95th percentile pressure, a higher 95th percentile leak, and a higher residual AHI than those with a NM: pressure requirement: 12.9 cm H2O (IQR: 10.6-15.0) versus 10.7 cm H2O (IQR: 9.2-12.3); leak: 21.6 L/min (IQR: 9.6-37.2) versus 9.6 L/min (IQR: 3.6-19.2); and residual AHI: 4.9/h (IQR: 2.4-10.2) versus 2.2/h (IQR: 1.0-4.4), respectively (p < 0.001 for all). CONCLUSIONS: CPAP mask type based on individual preferences exerts profound effects on optimal CPAP pressures and efficacy. Patients titrated with OM showed higher pressure requirements, had higher a leak, and higher residual AHI when compared to NM, which may adversely impact treatment adherence and other health outcomes.
Authors: R Heinzer; S Vat; P Marques-Vidal; H Marti-Soler; D Andries; N Tobback; V Mooser; M Preisig; A Malhotra; G Waeber; P Vollenweider; M Tafti; J Haba-Rubio Journal: Lancet Respir Med Date: 2015-02-12 Impact factor: 30.700
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: Vishesh K Kapur; Dennis H Auckley; Susmita Chowdhuri; David C Kuhlmann; Reena Mehra; Kannan Ramar; Christopher G Harrod Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2017-03-15 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: A T Mulgrew; G Nasvadi; A Butt; R Cheema; N Fox; J A Fleetham; C F Ryan; P Cooper; N T Ayas Journal: Thorax Date: 2008-01-30 Impact factor: 9.139
Authors: Kelvin Duong; Joel Glover; Alexander C Perry; Deborah Olmstead; Mark Ungrin; Pina Colarusso; Joanna E MacLean; Andrew R Martin Journal: ERJ Open Res Date: 2021-02-01