医学
阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停
随机对照试验
补充氧气
睡眠呼吸暂停
睡眠(系统调用)
牙科
物理疗法
麻醉
外科
计算机科学
操作系统
作者
Bradley A. Edwards,Luke D. J. Thomson,Daniel Vena,Achilleas Gikas,Reza Radmand,N. Calianese,Lauren B. Hess,Jinny Collet,Dillon Gilbertson,Natalie V. Lawrence,Shane A. Landry,Simon A. Joosten,Garun S. Hamilton,Andrew Wellman,Scott A. Sands
出处
期刊:The European respiratory journal
[European Respiratory Society]
日期:2025-10-02
卷期号:67 (1): 2501320-2501320
被引量:2
标识
DOI:10.1183/13993003.01320-2025
摘要
Background Treatment for obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) is limited by intolerance to continuous positive airway pressure. While OSA manifests due to both increased pharyngeal collapsibility and ventilatory control instability, randomised trials targeting both components are lacking. We tested whether combining a ventilatory control intervention (supplemental oxygen) with an upper airway mechanical intervention (mandibular advancement device (MAD)) improves treatment efficacy. Methods In a multicentre randomised crossover trial, 41 patients with moderate-to-severe OSA (apnoea–hypopnoea index (AHI) >20 events·h −1 , scored without desaturation criteria) underwent polysomnography with four single-night interventions: oxygen (4 L·min −1 ), MAD, combination therapy and sham (air). Primary analysis compared percent change in AHI from baseline between combination therapy and MAD monotherapy. Secondary outcomes included arousal index and visual analogue scale for sleep quality (VASSQ). Gold standard baseline pathophysiological traits facilitated mechanistic subgroup analysis. Results Of 41 randomised patients (14 females:27 males, median (interquartile range) baseline AHI 49 (29, 62) events·h −1 ), 38 completed all interventions. Compared with sham, AHI was lowered with oxygen (estimate: −33 (95% CI −46, −17)%), MAD (−54 (95% CI −64, −41)%) and the combination (−68 (95% CI −77, −57)%); the combination provided a greater reduction than MAD monotherapy (−14 (95% CI −23, −4)%; p=0.009). The combination also improved AHI per 3% desaturation/arousal criteria (−73 (95% CI −81, −62)% versus sham and −17 (95% CI −25, −7)% versus MAD). The combination improved arousal index (−36 (95% CI −43, −27)% versus sham) and VASSQ (+0.98 (95% CI 0.39, 1.58) versus sham), albeit not significantly beyond MAD alone. Effects were greatest in those with higher loop gain and collapsibility. Conclusion Combining a ventilatory control intervention (supplemental oxygen) with an upper airway intervention (MAD) is a promising approach to markedly attenuate OSA severity beyond that offered by each intervention alone.
科研通智能强力驱动
Strongly Powered by AbleSci AI