Dataset Information

An Examination of Methodological Paradigms for Calculating Upper Airway Critical Pressures during Sleep.

ABSTRACT:

Study objectives

The goal of this study was to examine different paradigms for determining critical closing pressures (Pcrit). Methods of determining Pcrit were compared, including direct observation of occluded (no flow) breaths versus inferring Pcrit from extrapolated data, and Pcrit generated by aggregating pressure-flow data from multiple runs versus Pcrit averaged across individual pressure-flow runs. The relationship between Pcrit and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) was examined.

Methods

A total of 351 participants with and without OSA underwent overnight polysomnography with pressure-flow measurements to determine Pcrit. A series of filters were applied to raw data to provide consistent, objective criteria for determining which data to include in Pcrit calculations. Observed Pcrit values were computed as the mean nasal pressure level at which a subject had at least two breaths with peak inspiratory flow < 50 mL/sec. Extrapolated Pcrit was calculated in two ways: (1) separately for each individual run and then averaged; and (2) using all valid data from individual runs combined into one plot.

Results

Observed Pcrit was calculated in 67% to 69% of participants, a similar or higher proportion of study subjects compared to extrapolated Pcrit values using a ± 3 cm H2O filter. Although raw (unfiltered) extrapolated Pcrit measures were able to be calculated among a greater proportion of participants than filtered, extrapolated Pcrit values, and thus had fewer missing values, they had larger variability. Both extrapolated and observed Pcrit were higher among individuals with OSA compared to those without OSA.

Conclusions

Observed Pcrit provides a reliable descriptor of hypotonic upper airway collapsibility. Different methods for determining Pcrit were able to distinguish subjects with and without OSA.

SUBMITTER: Pien GW

PROVIDER: S-EPMC4835319 | biostudies-literature | 2016 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

An Examination of Methodological Paradigms for Calculating Upper Airway Critical Pressures during Sleep.

Pien Grace W GW Keenan Brendan T BT Marcus Carole L CL Staley Bethany B Ratcliffe Sarah J SJ Jackson Nicholas J NJ Wieland William W Sun Yi Y Schwab Richard J RJ

Sleep 20160501 5

<h4>Study objectives</h4>The goal of this study was to examine different paradigms for determining critical closing pressures (Pcrit). Methods of determining Pcrit were compared, including direct observation of occluded (no flow) breaths versus inferring Pcrit from extrapolated data, and Pcrit generated by aggregating pressure-flow data from multiple runs versus Pcrit averaged across individual pressure-flow runs. The relationship between Pcrit and obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) was examined.<h4> ...[more]

PMID: 26951393

Similar Datasets

Project description:Study objectivesDrug-induced sleep endoscopy (DISE) using propofol is commonly used to identify the pharyngeal structure involved in collapse among patients with obstructive sleep apnea. DISE has never been compared with zolpidem-induced sleep endoscopy. We hypothesized that propofol at recommended sedation levels does not influence upper airway collapsibility nor the frequency of multilevel pharyngeal collapse as compared with zolpidem-induced sleep.MethodsTwenty-one patients with obstructive sleep apnea underwent polysomnography and sleep endoscopy during zolpidem-induced sleep and during DISE with propofol. A propofol target-controlled infusion was titrated to achieve a bispectral index between 50 and 70. Airway collapsibility was estimated and compared in both conditions by peak inspiratory flow and the magnitude of negative effort dependence. Respiratory drive was estimated by the difference between end-expiratory and peak-negative inspiratory pharyngeal pressure (driving pressure). Site and configuration of pharyngeal collapse during zolpidem-induced sleep and DISE with propofol were compared.ResultsThe frequency of multilevel collapse during zolpidem-induced sleep was similar to that observed during DISE with propofol (72% vs 86%, respectively; difference: 14%; 95% confidence interval: -12% to 40%; P = .453). The endoscopic classification of pharyngeal collapse during both conditions were similar. Peak inspiratory flow, respiratory drive (effect size: 0.05 and 0.03, respectively), and negative effort dependence (difference: -6%; 95% confidence interval: -16% to 4%) were also similar in both procedures.ConclusionsIn this pilot study, recommended propofol doses did not significantly increase multilevel pharyngeal collapse or affect upper airway collapsibility and respiratory drive as compared with zolpidem-induced sleep.Clinical trial registrationRegistry: clinicaltrials.gov; Name: Natural and Drug Sleep Endoscopy; URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/study/NCT03004014; Identifier: NCT03004014.

Project description:Study Objectives: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is increasingly recognized as a complex and heterogenous disorder. As a result, a "one-size-fits-all" management approach should be avoided. Therefore, evaluation of pathophysiological endotyping in OSA patients is emphasized, with upper airway collapse during sleep as one of the main features. To assess the site(s) and pattern(s) of upper airway collapse, natural sleep endoscopy (NSE) is defined as the gold standard. As NSE is labor-intensive and time-consuming, it is not feasible in routine practice. Instead, drug-induced sleep endoscopy (DISE) is the most frequently used technique and can be considered as the clinical standard. Flow shape and snoring analysis are non-invasive measurement techniques, yet are still evolving. Although DISE is used as the clinical alternative to assess upper airway collapse, associations between DISE and NSE observations, and associated flow and snoring signals, have not been quantified satisfactorily. In the current project we aim to compare upper airway collapse identified in patients with OSA using endoscopic techniques as well as flow shape analysis and analysis of tracheal snoring sounds between natural and drug-induced sleep. Methods: This study is a blinded prospective comparative multicenter cohort study. The study population will consist of adult patients with a recent diagnosis of OSA. Eligible patients will undergo a polysomnography (PSG) with NSE overnight and a DISE within 3 months. During DISE the upper airway is assessed under sedation by an experienced ear, nose, throat (ENT) surgeon using a flexible fiberoptic endoscope in the operating theater. In contrast to DISE, NSE is performed during natural sleep using a pediatric bronchoscope. During research DISE and NSE, the standard set-up is expanded with additional PSG measurements, including gold standard flow and analysis of tracheal snoring sounds. Conclusions: This project will be one of the first studies to formally compare collapse patterns during natural and drug-induced sleep. Moreover, this will be, to the authors' best knowledge, the first comparative research in airflow shape and tracheal snoring sounds analysis between DISE and NSE. These novel and non-invasive diagnostic methods studying upper airway mechanics during sleep will be simultaneously validated against DISE and NSE. Clinical Trial Registration: www.ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT04729478.

Dataset Information

An Examination of Methodological Paradigms for Calculating Upper Airway Critical Pressures during Sleep.

Study objectives

Methods

Results

Conclusions

Publications

An Examination of Methodological Paradigms for Calculating Upper Airway Critical Pressures during Sleep.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets