Sleep Disorders Center and Pulmonary Division, University Hospital Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Zurich Center for Interdisciplinary Sleep Research, University of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.
Thorax. 2018 Feb;73(2):174-184. doi: 10.1136/thoraxjnl-2016-209699. Epub 2017 Oct 5.
The obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome (OSAS) is conventionally treated by continuous positive airway pressure set at a fixed level (fCPAP). Automatic mask pressure adjustment (autoCPAP) is increasingly used during home therapy. We investigated whether autoCPAP is equivalent to fCPAP in improving sleepiness in patients with OSAS in the long-term.
In this multicentre equivalence trial, 208 patients with OSAS, with median Epworth sleepiness score (ESS) 13, apnoea/hypopnoea index 48.4/hour, were randomised to treatment with autoCPAP (5-15 mbar) or fCPAP (pressure set at the 90th percentile applied by autoCPAP during 2-4 weeks adaptation). Coprimary outcomes were changes in subjective and objective sleepiness from baseline to 2 years after treatment. Equivalence ranges were ±2 points in ESS and ±3 min sleep resistance time evaluated by recording responses to light signals.
At 2 years, in the intention to treat analysis, the reduction in sleepiness versus pretreatment baseline was similar in patients using autoCPAP (n=113, mean ESS-change -6.3, 95% CI -7.1 to -5.5; sleep resistance time +8.3 min, +6.9 to +9.7) and fCPAP (n=95, mean ESS-change -6.2, 95% CI -7.0 to -5.3; sleep resistance time +6.3 min, +4.7 to +7.8). The 95% CI of difference in ESS-reduction between autoCPAP and fCPAP was -0.9 to +1.4 and the 95% CI of difference in increase in sleep resistance time was -2.6 to +1.0 min. Blood pressure reduction and OSAS-related costs were similar between groups.
AutoCPAP and fCPAP are equivalent within prespecified ranges in improving subjective and objective sleepiness in patients with OSAS over the course of 2 years. Costs of these treatments are similar.
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00280800.
阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停综合征(OSAS)传统上通过设定在固定水平的持续气道正压通气(CPAP)进行治疗。自动面罩压力调节(autoCPAP)在家庭治疗中越来越多地被使用。我们研究了在长期治疗中,autoCPAP 是否在改善 OSAS 患者的嗜睡方面与 fCPAP 等效。
在这项多中心等效性试验中,208 名 OSAS 患者,中位 Epworth 嗜睡评分(ESS)为 13,呼吸暂停/低通气指数为 48.4/小时,被随机分配接受 autoCPAP(5-15 mbar)或 fCPAP(在 2-4 周适应期内由 autoCPAP 施加的第 90 百分位压力)治疗。主要结局是从基线到治疗 2 年后主观和客观嗜睡的变化。等效范围为 ESS 变化±2 分,记录对光信号的反应评估的睡眠抵抗时间变化±3 分钟。
在意向治疗分析中,在使用 autoCPAP 的患者(n=113)中,与治疗前基线相比,嗜睡的减少类似于在使用 fCPAP 的患者(n=95)(ESS 变化-6.3,95%CI-7.1 至-5.5;睡眠抵抗时间增加 8.3 分钟,6.9 至 9.7)。在使用 autoCPAP 和 fCPAP 的患者中,ESS 降低的 95%CI 差值为-0.9 至+1.4,睡眠抵抗时间增加的 95%CI 差值为-2.6 至+1.0 分钟。两组之间的血压降低和 OSAS 相关成本相似。
在预设范围内,autoCPAP 和 fCPAP 在改善 OSAS 患者的主观和客观嗜睡方面在 2 年内是等效的。这些治疗的成本相似。
ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00280800。