NightBalance Sleep Position Treatment Device Versus Auto-Adjusting Positive Airway Pressure for Treatment of Positional Obstructive Sleep Apnea.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: Compare treatment efficacy and objective adherence between the NightBalance sleep position treatment (SPT) device and auto-adjusting positive airway pressure (APAP) in patients with exclusive positional obstructive sleep apnea (ePOSA) defined as a supine apnea-hypopnea index (sAHI) ≥ 2 times the nonsupine AHI (nsAHI) and a nsAHI < 10 events/h. METHODS: This prospective multicenter randomized crossover trial enrolled treatment naive participants with ePOSA (AHI ≥ 15 events/h and nsAHI < 10 events/h) or (AHI > 10 and < 15 events/h with daytime sleepiness and nsAH < 5 events/h). Polysomnography and objective adherence determination (device data) were performed at the end of each 6-week treatment. Patient device preference was determined at the end of the study. RESULTS: A total of 117 participants were randomized (58 SPT first, 59 APAP first). Of these, 112 started treatment with the second device (adherence cohort) and 110 completed the study (AHI cohort). The AHI on SPT was higher (mean ± standard deviation, 7.29 ± 6.8 versus 3.71 ± 5.1 events/h, P < .001). The mean AHI difference (SPT-APAP) was 3.58 events/h with a one sided 95% confidence interval upper bound of 4.96 events/h (< the prestudy noninferiority margin of 5 events/h). The average nightly adherence (all nights) was greater on SPT (345.3 ± 111.22 versus 286.98 ± 128.9 minutes, P < .0001). Participants found the SPT to be more comfortable and easier to use and 53% reported a preference for SPT assuming both devices were equally effective. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment with SPT resulted in non-inferior treatment efficacy and greater adherence compared to APAP in ePOSA suggesting that SPT is an effective treatment for this group. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Registry: ClinicalTrials.gov; Title: The POSAtive Study: Study for the Treatment of Positional Obstructive Sleep Apnea; Identifier: NCT03061071; URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03061071.

Home-use servo-ventilation therapy in chronic pain patients with central sleep apnea: initial and 3-month follow-up.

PURPOSE: Opioid treatment of non-malignant chronic pain can result in hypoxemia, hypercarbia, and central sleep apnea. The aim of this study was to determine the initial efficacy of auto servo-ventilation (ASV) and after 3 months of home use. METHODS: This prospective multicenter interventional study recruited chronic pain patients prescribed ≥100 morphine equivalents for at least 4 months. PARTICIPANTS: Following full-night polysomnography (PSG) to confirm the presence of sleep-disordered breathing, patients were randomized to three additional full-night-attended PSGs with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), ASV, and servo-ventilation with an initial mandatory pressure support of 6 cm H2O (ASV manual PSmin 6). Following the PSGs, patients were sent home with EncoreAnywhere and ASV with or without mandatory pressure support. RESULTS: Based on the initial PSG studies, CPAP improved but did not normalize the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI), central apnea index (CAI), or hypopnea index (HI), as all remained elevated. Clinically significant reductions were noted after just one night of ASV and ASV manual (PSmin 6). After 3 months of ASV home use, the AHI, CAI, and obstructive apnea index (OAI) were significantly reduced when compared to baseline diagnostic levels and even when compared to respiratory disturbance indices with CPAP treatment. CONCLUSIONS: Initial and home use of ASV for 3 months resulted in significantly lower AHI, CAI, and OAI. This reduction attests to the efficacy of ASV treatment in chronic pain patients on high doses of opioids.