Department of Medicine, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York.
Department of Health Research Methods, Evidence, and Impact, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario, Canada.
Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2019 Oct;16(10):1295-1303. doi: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.201905-380OC.
Obesity hypoventilation syndrome (OHS) is an undesirable consequence of obesity. Treatment consists of weight loss and positive airway pressure (PAP) therapy. However, the preferred mode of PAP is uncertain. To perform a systematic review to determine whether PAP therapy should be initiated as noninvasive ventilation (NIV) or continuous PAP (CPAP) in ambulatory patients with OHS. This systematic review informed an international, multidisciplinary panel of experts who had converged to develop a clinical practice guideline on OHS for the American Thoracic Society. MEDLINE, the Cochrane Library, and Embase were searched from January 1946 to March 2019 for studies that compared initial treatment with NIV to CPAP in OHS. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach was used to appraise the quality of evidence. The search identified 2,994 potentially relevant articles, the full text of 21 articles was reviewed, and five articles were selected. The five articles included three randomized trials (one reported as two articles) and an observational study. The sample size ranged from 36 to 225 subjects. The evidence showed no differences in mortality, cardiovascular events, and healthcare resource use between patients with OHS treated with NIV or CPAP. Both PAP modalities were similarly effective in improving gas exchange, the need for supplemental oxygen, daytime sleepiness, sleep quality, quality of life, dyspnea, and sleep-disordered breathing. There was also no significant difference in adherence to NIV or CPAP therapy. Certainty in the estimated effects was low or very low for some outcomes. Therefore, the conditional recommendation was based on very low-quality evidence. The panel made a conditional (i.e., weak) recommendation that CPAP rather than NIV be offered as the first-line treatment to stable ambulatory patients with OHS and coexistent severe obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). The effectiveness of CPAP is similar to that of NIV, but NIV is more costly and requires more resources than CPAP. Given that approximately 70% of patients with OHS have coexistent severe OSA, this recommendation applies to the great majority of patients with stable OHS, but it should not be extrapolated to patients with OHS without severe OSA. Patients of advanced age, with poor lung function, or with greater or recent acute ventilatory failure may not respond adequately to CPAP.
肥胖低通气综合征(OHS)是肥胖的一种不良后果。治疗包括减轻体重和使用正压通气(PAP)疗法。然而,首选的 PAP 模式尚不确定。进行系统评价,以确定在患有 OHS 的门诊患者中,PAP 治疗是否应作为无创通气(NIV)或持续气道正压通气(CPAP)开始。这项系统评价为美国胸科学会(American Thoracic Society)制定 OHS 临床实践指南提供了信息,该指南由国际多学科专家小组制定。从 1946 年 1 月到 2019 年 3 月,MEDLINE、Cochrane 图书馆和 Embase 搜索了比较初始治疗 NIV 与 OHS 中 CPAP 的研究。使用推荐评估、制定与评价(Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation)方法评估证据质量。搜索确定了 2994 篇潜在相关文章,对 21 篇文章的全文进行了审查,并选择了 5 篇文章。这 5 篇文章包括 3 项随机试验(一项报告为 2 篇文章)和一项观察性研究。样本量范围从 36 到 225 例。证据表明,接受 NIV 或 CPAP 治疗的 OHS 患者在死亡率、心血管事件和医疗资源使用方面没有差异。两种 PAP 方式在改善气体交换、对补充氧气的需求、日间嗜睡、睡眠质量、生活质量、呼吸困难和睡眠呼吸障碍方面同样有效。NIV 或 CPAP 治疗的依从性也没有显著差异。对于某些结局,估计效果的确定性为低或极低。因此,条件推荐是基于低质量证据。专家组提出了一项有条件(即弱)的建议,即对于稳定的、有合并严重阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停(OSA)的 OHS 门诊患者,应提供 CPAP 而不是 NIV 作为一线治疗。CPAP 的有效性与 NIV 相似,但 NIV 比 CPAP 更昂贵,需要更多资源。鉴于约 70%的 OHS 患者合并有严重的 OSA,该建议适用于大多数稳定的 OHS 患者,但不适用于没有严重 OSA 的 OHS 患者。高龄、肺功能差或近期急性通气衰竭的患者可能无法对 CPAP 充分反应。