Journals / Turkish Thoracic Journal / 2021 / Cilt: 22 - Sayı: 6

The Evaluation of APAP Titration Results: Good Titration Versus TECSA and Unacceptable Titration

Pages
450–458
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

CONCLUSION: The baseline polysomnographic features, including higher central apnea index and minimum SpO2, may raise suspicion for titration failures for which a laboratory-based titration can be scheduled.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:OBJECTIVE: The first choice for treatment in severe and moderate obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) is positive airway pressure (PAP) devices.
📊
Key Findings & Data:However, despite proper titration, respiratory events may persist, while central respiratory events may increase or emerge for some patients.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:CONCLUSION: The baseline polysomnographic features, including higher central apnea index and minimum SpO2, may raise suspicion for titration failures for which a laboratory-based titration can be scheduled.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2017 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Özet

OBJECTIVE: The first choice for treatment in severe and moderate obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) is positive airway pressure (PAP) devices. However, despite proper titration, respiratory events may persist, while central respiratory events may increase or emerge for some patients. The primary aim of this study is to compare the clinical, demographic, and polysomnographic features of patients with different titration results. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The patients who underwent automatic PAP (APAP) titration with the nasal mask in our clinic due to moderate or severe OSAS in 2017 were included in the study. The clinical, demographic, and polysomnographic characteristics of patients with successful (good) titration, “unacceptable” APAP titration, and treatment-emergent central apnea syndrome (TECSA), were recorded retrospectively and evaluated comparatively with statistical methods. RESULTS: Out of 942 titration tests with APAP, 37 patients were diagnosed as TECSA (3.9%), while unacceptable (unsuccessful) titration results were seen only in 20 patients (2.1%). For the successful titration group, 44 consecutive patients were recruited. In the TECSA group, the central apnea index and minimum SpO2 were higher during the diagnostic polysomnography (PSG). In the unacceptable titration group, the baseline minimum SpO2 was lower. The lower sleep efficiency, lower stage N3 sleep, and longer rapid eye movement (REM) and sleep latencies were observed in the TECSA group during the titration test. The diagnostic accuracy of PAP device recordings was found to be moderate (kappa value: 0.533). CONCLUSION: The baseline polysomnographic features, including higher central apnea index and minimum SpO2, may raise suspicion for titration failures for which a laboratory-based titration can be scheduled.

🔖

Cite This Article

DUYAR, S. Ş., ÇELİK, D., FIRAT, S. (2021). The Evaluation of APAP Titration Results: Good Titration Versus TECSA and Unacceptable Titration. Turkish Thoracic Journal, Cilt: 22 - Sayı: 6, 450–458. https://ajindex.com/articles/402957

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (14)

  1. Kim H, Lee M, Hwangbo Y, Yang KI. Automatic derivation of continuous positive airway pressure settings: comparison with inlaboratory titration. J Clin Neurol. 2020
  2. 16(2):314-320. [CrossRef] 2. ICSD-3. International Classification of Sleep Disorders, Third Edition: Diagnostic & Coding Manual. 2nd ed. Westchester, NY: American Academy of Sleep Medicine
  3. Moro M, Gannon K, Lovell K, et al. Clinical predictors of central sleep apnea evoked by positive airway pressure titration. Nat Sci Sleep. 2016
  4. [CrossRef] 4. Kuźniar TJ, Kovačević-Ristanović R, Freedom T. Complex sleep apnea unmasked by the use of a mandibular advancement device. Sleep Breath. 2011
  5. 15(2):249-252. [CrossRef] 5. Corcoran S, Mysliwiec V, Niven AS, Fallah D. Development of central sleep apnea after maxillofacial surgery for obstructive sleep apnea. J Clin Sleep Med. 2009
  6. 5(2):151-153. [CrossRef] 6. Goldstein C, Kuzniar TJ. The emergence of central sleep apnea after surgical relief of nasal obstruction in obstructive sleep apnea. J Clin Sleep Med. 2012
  7. 8(3):321-322. [CrossRef] 7. Wang J, Wang Y, Feng J, Chen BY, Cao J. Complex sleep apnea syndrome. Patient Prefer Adherence. 2013
  8. [CrossRef] 8. Lehman S, Antic NA, Thompson C, et al. Central sleep apnea on commencement of continuous positive airway pressure in patients with a primary diagnosis of obstructive sleep apneahypopnea. J Clin Sleep Med. 2007
  9. 3(5):462-466. [CrossRef] 9. Kushida CA, Chediak A, Berry RB, et al. Positive Airway Pressure Titration Task Force
  10. American Academy of Sleep Medicine. Clinical guidelines for the manual titration of positive airway pressure in patients with obstructive sleep apnea positive airway pressure. J Clin Sleep Med. 2008
  11. 4(2):157-171. 10. Berry RB, Brooks R, Gamaldo CE, et al. American Academy of Sleep Medicine. The AASM Manual for the Scoring of Sleep and Associated Events: Rules, Terminology, and Technical Specifications, Version 2.3. Darien, IL: American Academy of Sleep Medicine
  12. (Available at: [CrossRef]) 11. Lebret M, Rotty MC, Argento C, et al. Comparison of autoand fixed-continuous positive airway pressure on air leak in patients with obstructive sleep apnea: data from a randomized controlled trial. Can Respir J. 2019
  13. 6310956. [CrossRef] 12. Thomas RJ, Shin C, Bianchi MT, Kushida C, Yun C. Distinct polysomnographic and ECG-spectrographic phenotypes embedded within obstructive sleep apnea. Sleep Sci Pract. 2017
  14. 1(1):11. [CrossRef] 13. Bosi M, de Vito A, Kote