Hertegonne Katrien B, Rombaut Bart, Houtmeyers Philippe, Van Maele Georges, Pevernagie Dirk A
Department of Respiratory Diseases, Ghent University Hospital, Ghent, Belgium.
Respiration. 2008;75(1):48-54. doi: 10.1159/000103515. Epub 2007 Jun 1.
Auto-adjustable continuous positive airway pressure devices are widely used in titration procedures to determine therapeutic pressure levels in obstructive sleep apnea patients. However, differences in operational characteristics may influence the effect on the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI).
We compared the titration performance of two devices based on detection of inspiratory flow limitation, i.e. the Respironics REMstar Auto (RR) and the ResMed Spirit (RS).
Fifty obstructive sleep apnea patients were recruited for a double-blind randomized crossover trial. Both devices were employed overnight by means of split-night polysomnography. The primary outcome was the AHI. Secondary outcome measures were the snoring index, pressure profiles and subjective appraisal of sleep quality assessed the morning after the sleep study. The Wilcoxon signed rank test for matched pairs was applied to assess differences between treatment conditions.
No significant differences were found in sleep parameters, subjective sleep quality and snoring index. The use of the RR was associated with a significantly lower AHI in comparison with the RS [mean (SD) 6.9 (11.6)/h vs. 9.4 (9.2)/h, p = 0.004]. This result was obtained at significantly lower pressure levels [P95 9.2 (2.3) cm H(2)O vs. 10.2 (1.5) cm H(2)O, p = 0.001].
While the RR provided a lower AHI than the RS at lower pressure levels, it could not be assessed whether this difference was relevant for clinical outcomes. However, this face-to-face comparison of Auto-adjustable continuous positive airway pressure devices seems useful for the assessment of titration efficacy.
自动调压持续气道正压通气设备广泛应用于滴定程序,以确定阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停患者的治疗压力水平。然而,操作特性的差异可能会影响对呼吸暂停低通气指数(AHI)的效果。
我们比较了基于吸气流量限制检测的两种设备的滴定性能,即伟康REMstar Auto(RR)和瑞思迈S9(RS)。
招募了50名阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停患者进行双盲随机交叉试验。两种设备均通过分夜多导睡眠图进行整夜使用。主要结局是AHI。次要结局指标包括打鼾指数、压力曲线以及睡眠研究后早晨对睡眠质量的主观评估。应用配对样本的Wilcoxon符号秩检验来评估治疗条件之间的差异。
在睡眠参数、主观睡眠质量和打鼾指数方面未发现显著差异。与RS相比,使用RR时AHI显著更低[均值(标准差)6.9(11.6)次/小时 vs. 9.4(9.2)次/小时,p = 0.004]。此结果是在显著更低的压力水平下获得的[第95百分位数9.2(2.3)cm H₂O vs. 10.2(1.5)cm H₂O,p = 0.001]。
虽然RR在较低压力水平下提供的AHI低于RS,但无法评估这种差异是否与临床结局相关。然而,这种自动调压持续气道正压通气设备的面对面比较似乎有助于评估滴定疗效。