Comparison of hypopnea definitions in lean patients with known obstructive sleep apnea hypopnea syndrome (OSAHS)

C. Guilleminault, Chad Hagen, N. T. Huynh

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

43 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Study objectives: In the interest of improving inter-rater reliability and standardization between sleep laboratories, hypopnea definitions were recently changed to place less emphasis on arousal scoring and more emphasis on oxygen desaturations. We sought to determine whether these changes would affect detection and treatment of OSAHS in lean patients-a group known to desaturate less-than-obese patients. Methods: Thirty-five lean subjects (15 male, 20 women, five post-menopausal) diagnosed OSAHS and a documented benefit from treatment had diagnostic polysomnograms (PSG) originally scored using the American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM) rule from 1999 (referred to as "Rule C"). These patients had appropriate clinical care based on those results. PSG records were then re-scored in a randomized and blinded fashion utilizing hypopnea Rule A and B of the 2007 AASM guidelines. Results: Baseline mean (SD) apnea hypopnea indices (AHI) for rules A, B, and C were 6.4 (3.1), 20.6 (8.2), and 26.9 (7.3), respectively (p <0.0001). Mean (SD) BMI was 24.4 (1.0). By design, all subjects were treatment responders. Eighty-six percent with CPAP, 83% with oral appliance, and 100% with surgical intervention reported resolution of their initial daytime or sleep complaint. Post-treatment AHIs for rules A, B, and C were 0.8 (0.9), 1.8 (1.2) and 2.3 (1.6; p <0.001). In all three scoring conditions, the AHI was reduced significantly with treatment (p <0.001). A repeated measures ANOVA of the difference between scoring methods indicated statistically significant differences between all three strategies at both pre- and post-treatment (p <0.001). Sleepiness on the Epworth sleepiness scale decreased from a mean of 10.9 (2.3) to 5.7 (1.3) with treatment (p <0.001). This change in subjective rating of sleepiness was more strongly correlated with rules B and C (r = 0.6) and more modestly correlated with Rule A scoring (r = 0.4). Conclusion: Response to treatment was more tightly correlated with arousal based scoring rules B and C in this group of lean subjects. The1999 hypopnea rule was used at baseline to detect this cohort of patients with OSAHS that ultimately benefitted from treatment. Rule B detected OSAHS and correlated well with response to treatment, but many more were categorized as mild (5 <AHI <15) at baseline. Since 40% of the subjects had an AHI less than 5 with Rule A, lack of sensitivity should be considered before applying Rule A to the scoring of sleep studies in lean patients.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)341-347
Number of pages7
JournalSleep and Breathing
Volume13
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - 2009

Fingerprint

Obstructive Sleep Apnea
Apnea
Sleep
Therapeutics
Arousal
Medicine
Sleep Apnea Syndromes
Analysis of Variance
Research Design
Guidelines
Oxygen

Keywords

  • Hypopnea
  • Obstructive sleep apnea
  • Obstructive sleep apnea hypopnea syndrome
  • Scoring
  • Scoring guidelines

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Otorhinolaryngology
  • Clinical Neurology

Cite this

Comparison of hypopnea definitions in lean patients with known obstructive sleep apnea hypopnea syndrome (OSAHS). / Guilleminault, C.; Hagen, Chad; Huynh, N. T.

In: Sleep and Breathing, Vol. 13, No. 4, 2009, p. 341-347.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Guilleminault, C. ; Hagen, Chad ; Huynh, N. T. / Comparison of hypopnea definitions in lean patients with known obstructive sleep apnea hypopnea syndrome (OSAHS). In: Sleep and Breathing. 2009 ; Vol. 13, No. 4. pp. 341-347.
@article{672f6ddbe0d7425dbd3c576f5d8584fa,
title = "Comparison of hypopnea definitions in lean patients with known obstructive sleep apnea hypopnea syndrome (OSAHS)",
abstract = "Study objectives: In the interest of improving inter-rater reliability and standardization between sleep laboratories, hypopnea definitions were recently changed to place less emphasis on arousal scoring and more emphasis on oxygen desaturations. We sought to determine whether these changes would affect detection and treatment of OSAHS in lean patients-a group known to desaturate less-than-obese patients. Methods: Thirty-five lean subjects (15 male, 20 women, five post-menopausal) diagnosed OSAHS and a documented benefit from treatment had diagnostic polysomnograms (PSG) originally scored using the American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM) rule from 1999 (referred to as {"}Rule C{"}). These patients had appropriate clinical care based on those results. PSG records were then re-scored in a randomized and blinded fashion utilizing hypopnea Rule A and B of the 2007 AASM guidelines. Results: Baseline mean (SD) apnea hypopnea indices (AHI) for rules A, B, and C were 6.4 (3.1), 20.6 (8.2), and 26.9 (7.3), respectively (p <0.0001). Mean (SD) BMI was 24.4 (1.0). By design, all subjects were treatment responders. Eighty-six percent with CPAP, 83{\%} with oral appliance, and 100{\%} with surgical intervention reported resolution of their initial daytime or sleep complaint. Post-treatment AHIs for rules A, B, and C were 0.8 (0.9), 1.8 (1.2) and 2.3 (1.6; p <0.001). In all three scoring conditions, the AHI was reduced significantly with treatment (p <0.001). A repeated measures ANOVA of the difference between scoring methods indicated statistically significant differences between all three strategies at both pre- and post-treatment (p <0.001). Sleepiness on the Epworth sleepiness scale decreased from a mean of 10.9 (2.3) to 5.7 (1.3) with treatment (p <0.001). This change in subjective rating of sleepiness was more strongly correlated with rules B and C (r = 0.6) and more modestly correlated with Rule A scoring (r = 0.4). Conclusion: Response to treatment was more tightly correlated with arousal based scoring rules B and C in this group of lean subjects. The1999 hypopnea rule was used at baseline to detect this cohort of patients with OSAHS that ultimately benefitted from treatment. Rule B detected OSAHS and correlated well with response to treatment, but many more were categorized as mild (5 <AHI <15) at baseline. Since 40{\%} of the subjects had an AHI less than 5 with Rule A, lack of sensitivity should be considered before applying Rule A to the scoring of sleep studies in lean patients.",
keywords = "Hypopnea, Obstructive sleep apnea, Obstructive sleep apnea hypopnea syndrome, Scoring, Scoring guidelines",
author = "C. Guilleminault and Chad Hagen and Huynh, {N. T.}",
year = "2009",
doi = "10.1007/s11325-009-0253-7",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "13",
pages = "341--347",
journal = "Sleep and Breathing",
issn = "1520-9512",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of hypopnea definitions in lean patients with known obstructive sleep apnea hypopnea syndrome (OSAHS)

AU - Guilleminault, C.

AU - Hagen, Chad

AU - Huynh, N. T.

PY - 2009

Y1 - 2009

N2 - Study objectives: In the interest of improving inter-rater reliability and standardization between sleep laboratories, hypopnea definitions were recently changed to place less emphasis on arousal scoring and more emphasis on oxygen desaturations. We sought to determine whether these changes would affect detection and treatment of OSAHS in lean patients-a group known to desaturate less-than-obese patients. Methods: Thirty-five lean subjects (15 male, 20 women, five post-menopausal) diagnosed OSAHS and a documented benefit from treatment had diagnostic polysomnograms (PSG) originally scored using the American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM) rule from 1999 (referred to as "Rule C"). These patients had appropriate clinical care based on those results. PSG records were then re-scored in a randomized and blinded fashion utilizing hypopnea Rule A and B of the 2007 AASM guidelines. Results: Baseline mean (SD) apnea hypopnea indices (AHI) for rules A, B, and C were 6.4 (3.1), 20.6 (8.2), and 26.9 (7.3), respectively (p <0.0001). Mean (SD) BMI was 24.4 (1.0). By design, all subjects were treatment responders. Eighty-six percent with CPAP, 83% with oral appliance, and 100% with surgical intervention reported resolution of their initial daytime or sleep complaint. Post-treatment AHIs for rules A, B, and C were 0.8 (0.9), 1.8 (1.2) and 2.3 (1.6; p <0.001). In all three scoring conditions, the AHI was reduced significantly with treatment (p <0.001). A repeated measures ANOVA of the difference between scoring methods indicated statistically significant differences between all three strategies at both pre- and post-treatment (p <0.001). Sleepiness on the Epworth sleepiness scale decreased from a mean of 10.9 (2.3) to 5.7 (1.3) with treatment (p <0.001). This change in subjective rating of sleepiness was more strongly correlated with rules B and C (r = 0.6) and more modestly correlated with Rule A scoring (r = 0.4). Conclusion: Response to treatment was more tightly correlated with arousal based scoring rules B and C in this group of lean subjects. The1999 hypopnea rule was used at baseline to detect this cohort of patients with OSAHS that ultimately benefitted from treatment. Rule B detected OSAHS and correlated well with response to treatment, but many more were categorized as mild (5 <AHI <15) at baseline. Since 40% of the subjects had an AHI less than 5 with Rule A, lack of sensitivity should be considered before applying Rule A to the scoring of sleep studies in lean patients.

AB - Study objectives: In the interest of improving inter-rater reliability and standardization between sleep laboratories, hypopnea definitions were recently changed to place less emphasis on arousal scoring and more emphasis on oxygen desaturations. We sought to determine whether these changes would affect detection and treatment of OSAHS in lean patients-a group known to desaturate less-than-obese patients. Methods: Thirty-five lean subjects (15 male, 20 women, five post-menopausal) diagnosed OSAHS and a documented benefit from treatment had diagnostic polysomnograms (PSG) originally scored using the American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM) rule from 1999 (referred to as "Rule C"). These patients had appropriate clinical care based on those results. PSG records were then re-scored in a randomized and blinded fashion utilizing hypopnea Rule A and B of the 2007 AASM guidelines. Results: Baseline mean (SD) apnea hypopnea indices (AHI) for rules A, B, and C were 6.4 (3.1), 20.6 (8.2), and 26.9 (7.3), respectively (p <0.0001). Mean (SD) BMI was 24.4 (1.0). By design, all subjects were treatment responders. Eighty-six percent with CPAP, 83% with oral appliance, and 100% with surgical intervention reported resolution of their initial daytime or sleep complaint. Post-treatment AHIs for rules A, B, and C were 0.8 (0.9), 1.8 (1.2) and 2.3 (1.6; p <0.001). In all three scoring conditions, the AHI was reduced significantly with treatment (p <0.001). A repeated measures ANOVA of the difference between scoring methods indicated statistically significant differences between all three strategies at both pre- and post-treatment (p <0.001). Sleepiness on the Epworth sleepiness scale decreased from a mean of 10.9 (2.3) to 5.7 (1.3) with treatment (p <0.001). This change in subjective rating of sleepiness was more strongly correlated with rules B and C (r = 0.6) and more modestly correlated with Rule A scoring (r = 0.4). Conclusion: Response to treatment was more tightly correlated with arousal based scoring rules B and C in this group of lean subjects. The1999 hypopnea rule was used at baseline to detect this cohort of patients with OSAHS that ultimately benefitted from treatment. Rule B detected OSAHS and correlated well with response to treatment, but many more were categorized as mild (5 <AHI <15) at baseline. Since 40% of the subjects had an AHI less than 5 with Rule A, lack of sensitivity should be considered before applying Rule A to the scoring of sleep studies in lean patients.

KW - Hypopnea

KW - Obstructive sleep apnea

KW - Obstructive sleep apnea hypopnea syndrome

KW - Scoring

KW - Scoring guidelines

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=70350270369&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=70350270369&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s11325-009-0253-7

DO - 10.1007/s11325-009-0253-7

M3 - Article

C2 - 19418083

AN - SCOPUS:70350270369

VL - 13

SP - 341

EP - 347

JO - Sleep and Breathing

JF - Sleep and Breathing

SN - 1520-9512

IS - 4

ER -