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.

Effectiveness of CPAP vs. Noninvasive Ventilation Based on Disease Severity in Obesity Hypoventilation Syndrome and Concomitant Severe Obstructive Sleep Apnea / El impacto de la terapia de presión positiva de larga duración en el síndrome de hipoventilación-obesidad en función de la gravedad de la enfermedad

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.ObjectiveTo determine if CPAP have similar effectiveness when compared to NIV according to OHS severity subgroups.MethodsPost 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.Results204 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.ConclusionIn 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. (AU)

Introducción: El síndrome de hipoventilación-obesidad (SHO) con apnea obstructiva del sueño (AOS) grave concomitante se trata con CPAPo ventilación no invasiva (VNI) durante el sueño. La VNI es más costosa, pero puede ser beneficiosa porque proporciona soporte ventilatorio; sin embargo, no existen estudios a largo plazo que comparen estas modalidades de tratamiento basándose en la gravedad del SHO.ObjetivoDeterminar si la CPAP tiene una eficacia similar a la VNI según los subgrupos de gravedad del SHO.MétodosAnálisis a posteriori del ensayo clínico aleatorizado Pickwick en el que 215 pacientes ambulatorios con SHO sin tratar y con AOS grave concomitante (definida como un índice de apnea-hipopnea [IAH] ≥ 30 episodios/hora) recibieron tratamiento con VNI o CPAP. En el presente análisis, la cohorte Pickwick se dividió en subgrupos según la gravedad basándose en el grado de hipercapnia diurna al inicio del estudio (PaCO2 de 45-49.9mm Hg o ≥ 50mm Hg). Se compararon las mediciones periódicas de PaCO2 y PaO2 durante los 3 años siguientes entre la CPAP y la VNI entre los dos subgrupos de gravedad. Se realizó un análisis estadístico utilizando un modelo lineal mixto.ResultadosSe analizaron 204 pacientes, 97 en el grupo de VNI y 107 en el grupo de CPAP. Las mejoras lineales de PaCO2 y PaO2 fueron similares entre la CPAP y la NIV según los subgrupos de gravedad en función de la PaCO2.ConclusiónEn los pacientes ambulatorios con SHO y AOS grave concomitante a los que se trató con VNI o CPAP, el tratamiento a largo plazo con VNI resultó similar a la CPAP, en cuanto a la mejora de la hipercapnia en vigilia, independientemente de la gravedad de la hipercapnia de inicio. Por lo tanto, en esta población de pacientes la decisión de prescribir CPAP o VNI no puede basarse exclusivamente en el nivel de partida de PaCO2. (AU)

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.

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).

Non-invasive Positive Airway Pressure in Obesity Hypoventilation Syndrome and Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease: Present and Future Perspectives.

Obesity hypoventilation syndrome (OHS) is a sleep disorder that has acquired great importance worldwide because of its prevalence and association with obesity leading to increased morbidity and mortality with reduced quality of life. The primary feature is insufficient sleep-related ventilation, resulting in abnormally elevated arterial carbon dioxide pressure (PaCO2) during sleep and demonstration of daytime hypoventilation. There are three main mechanisms that can generate diurnal hypoventilation in obese patients: alteration of the respiratory mechanics secondary to obesity; central hypoventilation secondary to leptin resistance and sleep disorder with sleep hypoventilation and obstructive apnoeas, which can be potentially solved with the use of positive airway pressure: non-invasive ventilation (NIV) and continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). There are no established guidelines for the treatment of OHS, and only a few randomised controlled trials have been published. In this review, we have gone over the role of positive airway pressure, in particular the mechanisms that produce improvement, ventilatory modes available, clinical applications, technical considerations and future research. In addition, we added a review on NIV efficacy in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), both in acute respiratory failure due to exacerbation and mainly in stable setting where more controversy and scientific contributions are coming.