Wu Hao, Yuan Xiandao, Zhan Xiaojun, Li Li, Wei Yongxiang
Beijing An Zhen Hospital, Capital Medical University, 2th Anzhen Road, Chaoyang District, Beijing, 100029, China.
Sleep Breath. 2015 Sep;19(3):769-74. doi: 10.1007/s11325-014-1057-y. Epub 2014 Sep 23.
Expiratory positive airway pressure (EPAP) nasal devices provide a new therapeutic option for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA).
Here, we review the literature about treatment of OSA with EPAP, which has been shown to reduce the apnea/hypopnea index (AHI) and daytime sleepiness.
Patients generally prefer EPAP to continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), and there are no serious adverse effects from its use. Although CPAP more effectively improves sleep apnea, a recent study showed similar outcomes in symptom improvement using EPAP. Patients with mild to moderate OSA who do not tolerate CPAP are appropriate candidates for EPAP. However, there are few well-designed clinical trials that evaluate efficacy.
More studies are needed to assess the efficacy of and compliance with EPAP nasal devices, to define which patients will benefit from EPAP therapy, and to compare EPAP to other alternative OSA therapies.
呼气末正压(EPAP)鼻用装置为阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停(OSA)提供了一种新的治疗选择。
在此,我们回顾了关于使用EPAP治疗OSA的文献,EPAP已被证明可降低呼吸暂停/低通气指数(AHI)和日间嗜睡程度。
患者通常更喜欢EPAP而非持续气道正压通气(CPAP),且使用EPAP没有严重不良反应。虽然CPAP能更有效地改善睡眠呼吸暂停,但最近一项研究表明,使用EPAP在症状改善方面有相似的结果。不耐受CPAP的轻至中度OSA患者是EPAP的合适适用对象。然而,很少有设计良好的临床试验来评估其疗效。
需要更多研究来评估EPAP鼻用装置的疗效和依从性,确定哪些患者将从EPAP治疗中获益,并将EPAP与其他OSA替代疗法进行比较。