Effectiveness of CPAP vs. Noninvasive Ventilation Based on Disease Severity in Obesity Hypoventilation Syndrome and Concomitant Severe Obstructive Sleep Apnea.

RATIONALE: Obesity hypoventilation syndrome (OHS) with concomitant severe obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is treated with CPAP or noninvasive ventilation (NIV) during sleep. NIV is costlier, but may be advantageous because it provides ventilatory support. However, there are no long-term trials comparing these treatment modalities based on OHS severity. OBJECTIVE: To determine if CPAP have similar effectiveness when compared to NIV according to OHS severity subgroups. METHODS: Post hoc analysis of the Pickwick randomized clinical trial in which 215 ambulatory patients with untreated OHS and concomitant severe OSA, defined as apnoea-hypopnea index (AHI)≥30events/h, were allocated to NIV or CPAP. In the present analysis, the Pickwick cohort was divided in severity subgroups based on the degree of baseline daytime hypercapnia (PaCO2 of 45-49.9 or ≥50mmHg). Repeated measures of PaCO2 and PaO2 during the subsequent 3 years were compared between CPAP and NIV in the two severity subgroups. Statistical analysis was performed using linear mixed-effects model. RESULTS: 204 patients, 97 in the NIV group and 107 in the CPAP group were analyzed. The longitudinal improvements of PaCO2 and PaO2 were similar between CPAP and NIV based on the PaCO2 severity subgroups. CONCLUSION: In ambulatory patients with OHS and concomitant severe OSA who were treated with NIV or CPAP, long-term NIV therapy was similar to CPAP in improving awake hypercapnia, regardless of the severity of baseline hypercapnia. Therefore, in this patient population, the decision to prescribe CPAP or NIV cannot be solely based on the presenting level of PaCO2.

Risk factors associated with pulmonary hypertension in obesity hypoventilation syndrome.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: Pulmonary hypertension (PH) is prevalent in obesity hypoventilation syndrome (OHS). However, there is a paucity of data assessing pathogenic factors associated with PH. Our objective is to assess risk factors that may be involved in the pathogenesis of PH in untreated OHS. METHODS: In a post hoc analysis of the Pickwick trial, we performed a bivariate analysis of baseline characteristics between patients with and without PH. Variables with a P value ≤ .10 were defined as potential risk factors and were grouped by theoretical pathogenic mechanisms in several adjusted models. Similar analysis was carried out for the 2 OHS phenotypes, with and without severe concomitant obstructive sleep apnea. RESULTS: Of 246 patients with OHS, 122 (50%) had echocardiographic evidence of PH defined as systolic pulmonary artery pressure ≥ 40 mm Hg. Lower levels of awake PaO2 and higher body mass index were independent risk factors in the multivariate model, with a negative and positive adjusted linear association, respectively (adjusted odds ratio 0.96; 95% confidence interval 0.93 to 0.98; P = .003 for PaO2, and 1.07; 95% confidence interval 1.03 to 1.12; P = .001 for body mass index). In separate analyses, body mass index and PaO2 were independent risk factors in the severe obstructive sleep apnea phenotype, whereas body mass index and peak in-flow velocity in early/late diastole ratio were independent risk factors in the nonsevere obstructive sleep apnea phenotype. CONCLUSIONS: This study identifies obesity per se as a major independent risk factor for PH, regardless of OHS phenotype. Therapeutic interventions targeting weight loss may play a critical role in improving PH in this patient population. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registry: Clinicaltrial.gov; Name: Alternative of Treatment in Obesity Hypoventilation Syndrome; URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01405976; Identifier: NCT01405976. CITATION: Masa JF, Benítez ID, Javaheri S, et al. Risk factors associated with pulmonary hypertension in obesity hypoventilation syndrome. J Clin Sleep Med. 2022;18(4):983-992.

Long-term Noninvasive Ventilation in Obesity Hypoventilation Syndrome Without Severe OSA: The Pickwick Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Noninvasive ventilation (NIV) is an effective form of treatment in obesity hypoventilation syndrome (OHS) with severe OSA. However, there is paucity of evidence in patients with OHS without severe OSA phenotype. RESEARCH QUESTION: Is NIV effective in OHS without severe OSA phenotype? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: In this multicenter, open-label parallel group clinical trial performed at 16 sites in Spain, we randomly assigned 98 stable ambulatory patients with untreated OHS and apnea-hypopnea index < 30 events/h (ie, no severe OSA) to NIV or lifestyle modification (control group) using simple randomization through an electronic database. The primary end point was hospitalization days per year. Secondary end points included other hospital resource utilization, incident cardiovascular events, mortality, respiratory functional tests, BP, quality of life, sleepiness, and other clinical symptoms. Both investigators and patients were aware of the treatment allocation; however, treating physicians from the routine care team were not aware of patients' enrollment in the clinical trial. The study was stopped early in its eighth year because of difficulty identifying patients with OHS without severe OSA. The analysis was performed according to intention-to-treat and per-protocol principles and by adherence subgroups. RESULTS: Forty-nine patients in the NIV group and 49 in the control group were randomized, and 48 patients in each group were analyzed. During a median follow-up of 4.98 years (interquartile range, 2.98-6.62), the mean hospitalization days per year ± SD was 2.60 ± 5.31 in the control group and 2.71 ± 4.52 in the NIV group (adjusted rate ratio, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.44-2.59; P = .882). NIV therapy, in contrast with the control group, produced significant longitudinal improvement in Paco2, pH, bicarbonate, quality of life (Medical Outcome Survey Short Form 36 physical component), and daytime sleepiness. Moreover, per-protocol analysis showed a statistically significant difference for the time until the first ED visit favoring NIV. In the subgroup with high NIV adherence, the time until the first event of hospital admission, ED visit, and mortality was longer than in the low adherence subgroup. Adverse events were similar between arms. INTERPRETATION: In stable ambulatory patients with OHS without severe OSA, NIV and lifestyle modification had similar long-term hospitalization days per year. A more intensive program aimed at improving NIV adherence may lead to better outcomes. Larger studies are necessary to better determine the long-term benefit of NIV in this subgroup of OHS. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT01405976; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Cost-effectiveness of positive airway pressure modalities in obesity hypoventilation syndrome with severe obstructive sleep apnoea.

BACKGROUND: Obesity hypoventilation syndrome (OHS) is treated with either non-invasive ventilation (NIV) or CPAP, but there are no long-term cost-effectiveness studies comparing the two treatment modalities. OBJECTIVES: We performed a large, multicentre, randomised, open-label controlled study to determine the comparative long-term cost and effectiveness of NIV versus CPAP in patients with OHS with severe obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) using hospitalisation days as the primary outcome measure. METHODS: Hospital resource utilisation and within trial costs were evaluated against the difference in effectiveness based on the primary outcome (hospitalisation days/year, transformed and non-transformed in monetary term). Costs and effectiveness were estimated from a log-normal distribution using a Bayesian approach. A secondary analysis by adherence subgroups was performed. RESULTS: In total, 363 patients were selected, 215 were randomised and 202 were available for the analysis. The median (IQR) follow-up was 3.01 (2.91-3.14) years for NIV group and 3.00 (2.92-3.17) years for CPAP. The mean (SD) Bayesian estimated hospital days was 2.13 (0.73) for CPAP and 1.89 (0.78) for NIV. The mean (SD) Bayesian estimated cost per patient/year in the NIV arm, excluding hospitalisation costs, was €2075.98 (91.6), which was higher than the cost in the CPAP arm of €1219.06 (52.3); mean difference €857.6 (105.5). CPAP was more cost-effective than NIV (99.5% probability) because longer hospital stay in the CPAP arm was compensated for by its lower costs. Similar findings were observed in the high and low adherence subgroups. CONCLUSION: CPAP is more cost-effective than NIV; therefore, CPAP should be the preferred treatment for patients with OHS with severe OSA. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01405976.

Echocardiographic Changes with Positive Airway Pressure Therapy in Obesity Hypoventilation Syndrome. Long-Term Pickwick Randomized Controlled Clinical Trial.

Rationale: Obesity hypoventilation syndrome (OHS) has been associated with cardiac dysfunction. However, randomized trials assessing the impact of long-term noninvasive ventilation (NIV) or continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) on cardiac structure and function assessed by echocardiography are lacking.Objectives: In a prespecified secondary analysis of the largest multicenter randomized controlled trial of OHS (Pickwick Project; N = 221 patients with OHS and coexistent severe obstructive sleep apnea), we compared the effectiveness of three years of NIV and CPAP on structural and functional echocardiographic changes.Methods: At baseline and annually during three sequential years, patients underwent transthoracic two-dimensional and Doppler echocardiography. Echocardiographers at each site were blinded to the treatment allocation. Statistical analysis was performed using a linear mixed-effects model with a treatment group and repeated measures interaction to determine the differential effect between CPAP and NIV.Measurements and Main Results: A total of 196 patients were analyzed: 102 were treated with CPAP and 94 were treated with NIV. Systolic pulmonary artery pressure decreased from 40.5 ± 1.47 mm Hg at baseline to 35.3 ± 1.33 mm Hg at three years with CPAP, and from 41.5 ± 1.56 mm Hg to 35.5 ± 1.42 with NIV (P < 0.0001 for longitudinal intragroup changes for both treatment arms). However, there were no significant differences between groups. NIV and CPAP therapies similarly improved left ventricular diastolic dysfunction and reduced left atrial diameter. Both NIV and CPAP improved respiratory function and dyspnea.Conclusions: In patients with OHS who have concomitant severe obstructive sleep apnea, long-term treatment with NIV and CPAP led to similar degrees of improvement in pulmonary hypertension and left ventricular diastolic dysfunction.Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01405976).

Long-term clinical effectiveness of continuous positive airway pressure therapy versus non-invasive ventilation therapy in patients with obesity hypoventilation syndrome: a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Obesity hypoventilation syndrome is commonly treated with continuous positive airway pressure or non-invasive ventilation during sleep. Non-invasive ventilation is more complex and costly than continuous positive airway pressure but might be advantageous because it provides ventilatory support. To date there have been no long-term trials comparing these treatment modalities. We therefore aimed to determine the long-term comparative effectiveness of both treatment modalities. METHODS: We did a multicentre, open-label, randomised controlled trial at 16 clinical sites in Spain. We included patients aged 15-80 years with untreated obesity hypoventilation syndrome and an apnoea-hypopnoea index of 30 or more events per h. We randomly assigned patients, using simple randomisation through an electronic database, to receive treatment with either non-invasive ventilation or continuous positive airway pressure. Both investigators and patients were aware of the treatment allocation. The research team was not involved in deciding hospital treatment, duration of treatment in the hospital, and adjustment of medications, as well as adjudicating cardiovascular events or cause of mortality. Treating clinicians from the routine care team were not aware of the treatment allocation. The primary outcome was the number of hospitalisation days per year. The analysis was done according to the intention-to-treat principle. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01405976. FINDINGS: From May 4, 2009, to March 25, 2013, 100 patients were randomly assigned to the non-invasive ventilation group and 115 to the continuous positive airway pressure group, of which 97 patients in the non-invasive ventilation group and 107 in the continuous positive airway pressure group were included in the analysis. The median follow-up was 5·44 years (IQR 4·45-6·37) for all patients, 5·37 years (4·36-6·32) in the continuous positive airway pressure group, and 5·55 years (4·53-6·50) in the non-invasive ventilation group. The mean hospitalisation days per patient-year were 1·63 (SD 3·74) in the continuous positive airway pressure group and 1·44 (3·07) in the non-invasive ventilation group (adjusted rate ratio 0·78, 95% CI 0·34-1·77; p=0·561). Adverse events were similar between both groups. INTERPRETATION: In stable patients with obesity hypoventilation syndrome and severe obstructive sleep apnoea, non-invasive ventilation and continuous positive airway pressure have similar long-term effectiveness. Given that continuous positive airway pressure has lower complexity and cost, continuous positive airway pressure might be the preferred first-line positive airway pressure treatment modality until more studies become available. FUNDING: Instituto de Salud Carlos III, Spanish Respiratory Foundation, and Air Liquide Spain.

Primary Care Physicians Can Comprehensively Manage Patients with Sleep Apnea. A Noninferiority Randomized Controlled Trial.

Rationale: General practitioners play a passive role in obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) management. Simplification of the diagnosis and use of a semiautomatic algorithm for treatment can facilitate the integration of general practitioners, which has cost advantages.Objectives: To determine differences in effectiveness between primary health care area (PHA) and in-laboratory specialized management protocols during 6 months of follow-up.Methods: A multicenter, noninferiority, randomized, controlled trial with two open parallel arms and a cost-effectiveness analysis was performed in six tertiary hospitals in Spain. Sequentially screened patients with an intermediate to high OSA probability were randomized to PHA or in-laboratory management. The PHA arm involved a portable monitor with automatic scoring and semiautomatic therapeutic decision-making. The in-laboratory arm included polysomnography and specialized therapeutic decision-making. Patients in both arms received continuous positive airway pressure treatment or sleep hygiene and dietary treatment alone. The primary outcome measure was the Epworth Sleepiness Scale. Secondary outcomes were health-related quality of life, blood pressure, incidence of cardiovascular events, hospital resource utilization, continuous positive airway pressure adherence, and within-trial costs.Measurements and Main Results: In total, 307 patients were randomized and 303 were included in the intention-to-treat analysis. Based on the Epworth Sleepiness Scale, the PHA protocol was noninferior to the in-laboratory protocol. Secondary outcome variables were similar between the protocols. The cost-effectiveness relationship favored the PHA arm, with a cost difference of €537.8 per patient.Conclusions: PHA management may be an alternative to in-laboratory management for patients with an intermediate to high OSA probability. Given the clear economic advantage of outpatient management, this finding could change established clinical practice.Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT02141165).