ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Respiratory failure is a significant cause of morbidity and mortality in neuromuscular diseases. Although clinical findings and respiratory function tests aid in diagnosing sleep-related breathing disorders, polysomnography is the gold standard for the diagnosis of these disorders. We aimed to investigate the role of sleep-wake symptoms and clinical findings of patients with Duchenne muscular dystrophy (DMD) in predicting sleep-related breathing disorders through the comparison of polysomnography findings. In addition, we evaluated the sleep architecture of our patients. METHODS: A total of 35 children (12 patients with DMD and 23 controls) were included in this cross-sectional study. Activity status and clinical severity of the patients were determined by history and clinical findings such as scoliosis, obesity. All subjects were hospitalized for one night in the Sleep Unit and their polysomnography examinations were performed. Sleep, breathing, arousals and limb movements were scored manually according to the American Sleep Disorders Association criteria. RESULTS: Nocturnal and daytime symptoms were present in 50% of patients with DMD, 40.8% were wheelchair-bound and 58% had scoliosis. Obstructive sleep apnea was noted in 16.6% of patients with DMD. The apnea-hypopnea index, leg movement index were significantly higher in the DMD group as compared to the control group (P < 0.05). The number of desaturations, total arousal index and the percentage of total superficial sleep were significantly higher in patients with wheelchair, scoliosis, sleep-wake symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Being wheelchair-bound or having scoliosis do not predict sleep-related breathing disorders, so patients with DMD should be followed-up via polysomnography. Sleep-wake symptoms should be carefully questioned in these patients and symptomatic patients should be referred to pediatric respiratory units.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Efficacy of bronchodilator treatment in children with asthma depends on the proper use of inhalation devices. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of inhaled bronchodilator treatment with a spacer and a nebulizer in children with acute asthma findings. METHODS: Fifty-eight children with acute asthma findings who received ambulatory inhaled bronchodilator treatment with a nebulizer and 39 with a spacer were enrolled in the study. Duration of asthma, inhaled steroid treatment and the number of exacerbations during the previous year were recorded. Duration of current acute symptoms, exacerbation severity score and duration of respiratory findings after initiation of treatment were also recorded. RESULTS: Children in both groups were similar in age (76.5 +/- 30.3 months using a nebulizer vs 83.1 +/- 25.1 in spacer group, p = 0.26). Duration after diagnosis of asthma, initiation of inhaled steroid treatment and exacerbation symptoms were similar between groups (p = 0.15, 0.76 and 0.93, respectively). Exacerbation severity score in the nebulizer group was not significantly different from the spacer group (2.6 +/- 0.7 vs 2.8 +/- 0.7 respectively, p = 0.19). Number of exacerbations in the previous year was not different (2.0 +/- 1.2 in the nebulizer group vs 1.6 +/- 0.9 in the spacer group, p = 0.08). Duration of acute asthma findings after initiation of inhaled bronchodilator treatment was similar between the two groups (6.5 +/- 2.9 vs 7.2 +/- 4.6 p = 0.34). CONCLUSION: Nebulizers and spacers have similar influence on the duration of acute asthma findings in children when used in ambulatory home bronchodilator treatment.
