Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2016
Choosing an Oronasal Mask to Deliver Continuous Positive Airway Pressure May Cause More Upper Airway Obstruction or Lead to Higher Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Requirements than a Nasal Mask in Some Patients: A Case Series.
Клинический случайСтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Ng Justin R, Aiyappan Vinod, Mercer Jeremy, Catcheside Peter G, Chai-Coetzer Ching Li, McEvoy R Doug, Antic Nick
Аннотация
STUDY OBJECTIVES: The choice of mask interface used with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy can affect the control of upper airway obstruction (UAO) in obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). We describe a case series of four patients with paradoxical worsening of UAO with an oronasal mask and the effect of changing to a nasal mask.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the case histories of 4 patients and recorded patient demographics, in-laboratory and ambulatory CPAP titration data, CPAP therapy data, type of mask interface used and potential confounding factors.
RESULTS: The 4 cases (mean ± SD: age = 59 ± 16 y; BMI = 30.5 ± 4.5 kg/m(2)) had a high residual apnoea-hypopnea index (AHI) (43 ± 14.2 events/h) and high CPAP pressure requirements (14.9 ± 6.6 cmH2O) with an oronasal mask. Changing to a nasal mask allowed adequate control of UAO with a significant reduction in the average residual AHI (3.1 ± 1.5 events/h). In two of the four cases, it was demonstrated that control of UAO was obtained at a much lower CPAP pressure compared to the oronasal mask (Case one = 17.5 cmH2O vs 12cmH2O; Case two = 17.9 cmH2O vs 7.8 cmH2O). Other potential confounding factors were unchanged. There are various physiological observations that may explain these findings but it is uncertain which individuals are susceptible to these mechanisms.
CONCLUSIONS: If patients have OSA incompletely controlled by CPAP with evidence of residual UAO and/or are requiring surprisingly high CPAP pressure to control OSA with an oronasal mask, the choice of mask should be reviewed and consideration be given to a trial of a nasal mask.
COMMENTARY: A commentary on this article appears in this issue on page 1209.
METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed the case histories of 4 patients and recorded patient demographics, in-laboratory and ambulatory CPAP titration data, CPAP therapy data, type of mask interface used and potential confounding factors.
RESULTS: The 4 cases (mean ± SD: age = 59 ± 16 y; BMI = 30.5 ± 4.5 kg/m(2)) had a high residual apnoea-hypopnea index (AHI) (43 ± 14.2 events/h) and high CPAP pressure requirements (14.9 ± 6.6 cmH2O) with an oronasal mask. Changing to a nasal mask allowed adequate control of UAO with a significant reduction in the average residual AHI (3.1 ± 1.5 events/h). In two of the four cases, it was demonstrated that control of UAO was obtained at a much lower CPAP pressure compared to the oronasal mask (Case one = 17.5 cmH2O vs 12cmH2O; Case two = 17.9 cmH2O vs 7.8 cmH2O). Other potential confounding factors were unchanged. There are various physiological observations that may explain these findings but it is uncertain which individuals are susceptible to these mechanisms.
CONCLUSIONS: If patients have OSA incompletely controlled by CPAP with evidence of residual UAO and/or are requiring surprisingly high CPAP pressure to control OSA with an oronasal mask, the choice of mask should be reviewed and consideration be given to a trial of a nasal mask.
COMMENTARY: A commentary on this article appears in this issue on page 1209.