Mild obstructive sleep apnoea in females: post hoc analysis of the MERGE randomised controlled trial.

Background: A post hoc analysis of the MERGE trial was conducted, to investigate whether sex differences are evident at the mildest end of the disease spectrum, for symptoms associated with obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) and the response to continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) treatment. Methods: MERGE participants with mild OSA (apnoea-hypopnoea index 5-15 events·h-1; American Academy of Sleep Medicine 2012 criteria) were randomised to either CPAP plus standard care (sleep hygiene counselling) or standard care alone for 3 months. Quality of life (QoL) was measured by questionnaires completed before and after the 3 months. This post hoc analysis of participants of the MERGE trial compared the symptom presentation, and response to CPAP, between the sexes. Results: 233 patients were included; 71 (30%) were female. Females were more symptomatic at baseline in all QoL questionnaires. Specifically, females had lower 36-item Short-Form Health Survey (SF-36) Vitality scores (mean±sd 39.1±10.1 versus 44.8±10.3) and higher Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) scores (mean±sd 11.0±4.2 versus 9.5±4.4). Both sexes experienced snoring, but more females reported fatigue and more males reported witnessed apnoeas. All symptoms improved with CPAP for both sexes; however, females had larger improvements in SF-36 Vitality scores, which was the primary outcome of the MERGE trial (mean change 9.4 (95% CI 6.8-12.0) versus 6.0 (95% CI 4.3-7.7); p=0.034), and ESS (mean change -4.1 (95% CI -5.1- -3.0) versus -2.5 (95% CI -3.1- -1.8); p=0.015), after adjustment for baseline scores and CPAP usage. Conclusions: Sex differences are apparent in patients with mild OSA. Females experience worse QoL symptoms than males at presentation to the sleep clinic; however, these improve significantly with CPAP treatment.

Continuous positive airway pressure versus standard care for the treatment of people with mild obstructive sleep apnoea (MERGE): a multicentre, randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The evidence base for the treatment of mild obstructive sleep apnoea is limited and definitions of disease severity vary. The MERGE trial investigated the clinical effectiveness of continuous positive airway pressure in patients with mild obstructive sleep apnoea. METHODS: MERGE, a multicentre, parallel, randomised controlled trial enrolled patients (≥18 years to ≤80 years) with mild obstructive sleep apnoea (apnoea-hypopnoea index [AHI] ≥5 to ≤15 events per h using either AASM 2007 or AASM 2012 scoring criteria) from 11 UK sleep centres. Participants were assigned (1:1) to either 3 months of continuous positive airway pressure plus standard care (sleep counselling), or standard care alone, by computer-generated randomisation; neither participants nor researchers were blinded. The primary outcome was a change in the score on the Short Form-36 questionnaire vitality scale in the intention-to-treat population of patients with mild obstructive sleep apnoea diagnosed using the American Academy of Sleep Medicine 2012 scoring criteria. The study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02699463. FINDINGS: Between Nov 28, 2016 and Feb 12, 2019, 301 patients were recruited and randomised. 233 had mild obstructive sleep apnoea using AASM 2012 criteria and were included in the intention-to-treat analysis: 115 were allocated to receive continuous positive airway pressure and 118 to receive standard care. 209 (90%) of these participants completed the trial. The vitality score significantly increased with a treatment effect of a mean of 10·0 points (95% CI 7·2-12·8; p<0·0001) after 3 months of continuous positive airway pressure, compared with standard care alone (9·2 points [6·8 to 11·6] vs -0·8 points [-3·2 to 1·5]). Using the ANCOVA last-observation-carried-forward analysis, a more conservative estimate, the vitality score also significantly increased with a treatment effect of a mean of 7·5 points (95% CI 5·3 to 9·6; p<0·0001) after 3 months of continuous positive airway pressure, compared with standard care alone (7·5 points [6·0 to 9·0] vs 0·0 points [-1·5 to 1·5]). Three serious adverse events occurred (one allocated to the continuous positive airway pressure group) and all were unrelated to the intervention. INTERPRETATION: 3 months of treatment with continuous positive airway pressure improved the quality of life in patients with mild obstructive sleep apnoea. These results highlight the need for health-care professionals and providers to consider treatment for patients with mild obstructive sleep apnoea. FUNDING: ResMed Ltd.

Highlights from the 2018 European Respiratory Society International Congress: sleep and clinical physiology.

The 2018 European Respiratory Society (ERS) International Congress held in Paris, France, served as a platform to discover the latest research on respiratory diseases, the improvement in their treatments and patient care. Specifically, the scientific sessions organised by ERS Assembly 4 provided novel insights into sleep disordered breathing and fresh knowledge in respiratory physiology, stressing its importance to understanding and treating respiratory diseases. This article, divided by session, will summarise the most relevant studies presented at the ERS International Congress. Each session has been written by early career members specialised in the different fields of this interdisciplinary assembly.

Night-to-night variability of obstructive sleep apnea.

One night of a sleep study is the standard for diagnosis and exclusion of obstructive sleep apnea. Single testing requires high sensitivity of the test method and a stable disease of interest to warrant a low rate of false-negative tests. Obstructive sleep apnea is diagnosed and graded by conventional thresholds of apneas and hypopneas per hour of sleep, and treatment is usually initiated in the presence of symptoms. The aim of this study was to assess night-to-night variability of obstructive sleep apnea to reassess the current practice. Seventy-seven patients previously diagnosed with obstructive sleep apnea, randomised to continuous positive airway pressure withdrawal within four trials, performed nightly pulse-oximetry over 2 weeks while off continuous positive airway pressure. The main outcome of interest was the coefficient of variation of the oxygen desaturation index marking night-to-night variability in obstructive sleep apnea. Obstructive sleep apnea was categorised according to conventional thresholds using oxygen desaturation index (no obstructive sleep apnea: <5 per h; mild: 5-15 per h; moderate: 15-30 per h; and severe: >30 per h). High night-to-night variability of obstructive sleep apnea was evidenced by a coefficient of variation of oxygen desaturation index of 31.1% (SD 16.5). Differences in oxygen desaturation index of >10 per h between nights were found in 84.4% and shifts in obstructive sleep apnea severity category in 77.9% of patients. The probability of missing moderate obstructive sleep apnea was up to 60%. Variability was higher in less severe obstructive sleep apnea. Obstructive sleep apnea shows a considerable night-to-night variability. Single-night diagnostic sleep studies are prone to miscategorise obstructive sleep apnea if arbitrary thresholds are used. Thus, treatment decisions should be based less on the conventional derivatives from sleep studies, especially in patients with less severe obstructive sleep apnea. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.controlled-trials.com (ISRCTN 93153804, ISRCTN 73047833) and www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01332175 & NCT02050425).

In patients with minimally symptomatic OSA can baseline characteristics and early patterns of CPAP usage predict those who are likely to be longer-term users of CPAP.

BACKGROUND: Long-term continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) usage varies between individuals. It would be of value to be able to identify those who are likely to benefit from CPAP (and use it long term), versus those who would not, and might therefore benefit from additional help early on. First, we explored whether baseline characteristics predicted CPAP usage in minimally symptomatic obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) patients, a group who would be expected to have low usage. Second, we explored if early CPAP usage was predictive of longer-term usage, as has been shown in more symptomatic OSA patients. METHODS: The MOSAIC trial was a multi-centre randomised controlled trial where minimally symptomatic OSA patients were randomised to CPAP, or standard care, for 6 months. Here we have studied only those patients randomised to CPAP treatment. Baseline characteristics including symptoms, questionnaires [including the Epworth sleepiness score (ESS)] and sleep study parameters were recorded. CPAP usage was recorded at 2-4 weeks after initiation and after 6 months. The correlation and association between baseline characteristics and 6 months CPAP usage was assessed, as was the correlation between 2 and 4 weeks CPAP usage and 6 months CPAP usage. RESULTS: One hundred and ninety-five patients randomised to CPAP therapy had median [interquartile range (IQR)] CPAP usage of 2:49 (0:44, 5:13) h:min/night (h/n) at the 2-4 weeks visit, and 2:17 (0:08, 4:54) h/n at the 6 months follow-up visit. Only male gender was associated with increased long-term CPAP use (male usage 2:56 h/n, female 1:57 h/n; P=0.02). There was a moderate correlation between the usage of CPAP at 2-4 weeks and 6 months, with about 50% of the variability in long-term use being predicted by the short-term use. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with minimally symptomatic OSA, our study has shown that male gender (and not OSA severity or symptom burden) is associated with increased long-term use of CPAP at 6 months. Although, in general, early patterns of CPAP usage predicted longer term use, there are patients in whom this is not the case, and patients with low initial usage may need to extend their CPAP trial before a decision about longer-term use is made.