Sleep Apnea Syndromes: Wise MS

Kushida CA, Littner MR, Hirshkowitz M, Morgenthaler TI, Alessi CA, Bailey D, Boehlecke B, Brown TM, Coleman J, Friedman L, Kapen S, Kapur VK, Kramer M, Lee-Chiong T, Owens J, Pancer JP, Swick TJ, Wise MS, Anonymous00039. · Stanford University Center of Excellence for Sleep Disorders, Stanford, CA, USA. · Sleep. · Pubmed #16553024 No free full text.

Abstract: Positive airway pressure (PAP) devices are used to treat patients with sleep related breathing disorders (SRBD) including obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Currently, PAP devices come in three forms: (1) continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), (2) bilevel positive airway pressure (BPAP), and (3) automatic self-adjusting positive airway pressure (APAP). After a patient is diagnosed with OSA, the current standard of practice involves performing full, attended polysomnography during which positive pressure is adjusted to determine optimal pressure for maintaining airway patency. This titration is used to find a fixed single pressure for subsequent nightly usage. A task force of the Standards of Practice Committee of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine reviewed the available literature. Based on this review, the Standards of Practice Committee developed these practice parameters as a guideline for using CPAP and BPAP appropriately (an earlier review and practice parameters for APAP was published in 2002). Major conclusions and current recommendations are as follows: 1) A diagnosis of OSA must be established by an acceptable method. 2) CPAP is effective for treating OSA. 3) Full-night, attended studies performed in the laboratory are the preferred approach for titration to determine optimal pressure; however, split-night, diagnostic-titration studies are usually adequate. 4) CPAP usage should be monitored objectively to help assure utilization. 5) Initial CPAP follow-up is recommended during the first few weeks to establish utilization pattern and provide remediation if needed. 6) Longer-term follow-up is recommended yearly or as needed to address mask, machine, or usage problems. 7) Heated humidification and a systematic educational program are recommended to improve CPAP utilization. 8) Some functional outcomes such as subjective sleepiness improve with positive pressure treatment in patients with OSA. 9) CPAP and BPAP therapy are safe; side effects and adverse events are mainly minor and reversible. 10) BPAP may be useful in treating some forms of restrictive lung disease or hypoventilation syndromes associated with hypercapnia.

Littner M, Kushida CA, Hartse K, Anderson WM, Davila D, Johnson SF, Wise MS, Hirshkowitz M, Woodson BT. · VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare System, Sepulveda, CA, USA. · Sleep. · Pubmed #11480657 No free full text.

Abstract: Laser-assisted uvulopalatoplasty (LAUP) is an outpatient surgical procedure which is in use as a treatment for snoring. LAUP also has been used as a treatment for sleep-related breathing disorders, including obstructive sleep apnea. The Standards of Practice Committee of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine reviewed the available literature, and developed these practice parameters as a guide to the appropriate use of this surgery. Adequate controlled studies on the LAUP procedure for sleep-related breathing disorders were not found in peer-reviewed journals. This is consistent with findings in the original practice parameters on LAUP published in 1994. The following recommendations are based on the review of the literature: LAUP is not recommended for treatment of sleep-related breathing disorders. However, it does appear to be comparable to uvulopalatopharyngoplasty (UPPP) for treatment of snoring. Individuals who are candidates for LAUP as a treatment for snoring should undergo a polysomnographic or cardiorespiratory evaluation for sleep-related breathing disorders prior to LAUP and periodic postoperative evaluations for the development of same. Patients should be informed of the best available information of the risks, benefits, and complications of the procedure.

Redline S, Budhiraja R, Kapur V, Marcus CL, Mateika JH, Mehra R, Parthasarthy S, Somers VK, Strohl KP, Sulit LG, Gozal D, Wise MS, Quan SF. · Department of Pediatrics, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, WA 44106-6033, USA. · J Clin Sleep Med. · Pubmed #17557426 No free full text.

Abstract: The American Academy of Sleep Medicine Task Force on Respiratory Scoring reviewed the evidence that addresses: the validity of specific sensors in detecting airflow, tidal volume, oxyhemoglobin saturation, and CO2; the reliability of specific scoring approaches for quantifying sleep related breathing disorders (SRBD); and the validity of using various definitions of the apnea hypopnea index (AHI) as assessed by the strength and consistency of associations with several comorbidities (hypertension, cardiovascular disease, sleepiness, impaired quality of life, and accidents). The evidence was based on a literature search of relevant articles published through December 2004, which resulted in identifying and extracting data from 182 articles, which were graded using standardized approaches. Diverse physiological sensors have been utilized to quantify airflow limitation in patients with suspected SRBD. Although thermistry appears appropriate for identifying apneas, the available evidence did not indicate it provides valid quantification of airflow reduction. The emerging evidence evaluating the accuracy of signal detection against the gold standard measurements (e.g., pneumotachography) suggested the superiority of inductance plethysmography and nasal pressure transducers for detection of hypopneas, with some evidence that recordings from a nasal pressure transducer may better approximate flow/volume than uncalibrated inductance plethysmography. However, since the nasal pressure transducer has only recently been incorporated into large-scale studies, there are as of yet few data that address the predictive value of transducer-identified events relative to clinical or physiological outcomes. Very few studies directly compared the validity of alternative approaches for defining the duration, amplitude change, and use of corroborative data from desaturation or arousal for defining hypopneas. Many observational studies utilizing various designs and approaches for event detection have shown significant associations between measures of SRBD and health outcomes. Data from the 2 largest sleep cohort studies, the Sleep Heart Health Study and the Wisconsin Sleep Cohort, both used definitions of hypopneas based on "discernible" reductions of inductance plethysmography signals with associated desaturation and showed that the derived AHIs using these hypopnea definitions correlated with various indices of morbidity. However, it is not clear whether alternative definitions would provide comparable if not better prediction, or whether optimal approaches for event identification would vary for different outcomes. Despite these limitations, forming a consensus on optimal approaches for recording and measuring respiratory events is an important step toward generating data from different clinical or research laboratories that can be compared. However, additional research is needed, including direct comparisons of alternative measuring approaches for predicting clinical outcomes, with a need to address these issues in large samples across the age spectrum and with inclusion of promising new technology.