Anaesthesia · 2025
Validation and diagnostic performance of the novel B-APNEIC score for predicting severe obstructive sleep apnoea: a cross-sectional study in an Australian population.
СтатьяВалидационное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Thiruvenkatarajan Venkatesan, Khoo Benjamin Teng Jen, Roy Anil, Liu Wai-Man, Kathiravan Tharun, Van Wijk Roelof
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: The STOP-BANG questionnaire assesses the peri-operative risk of obstructive sleep apnoea and relies on subjective components, which limit its reliability. The B-APNEIC score was proposed as a more objective alternative, incorporating just four STOP-BANG variables: BMI > 35 kg.m-2; arterial blood pressure; neck circumference > 40 cm; and witnessed breathing interruptions. This study aimed to evaluate the predictive performance of the B-APNEIC score in an Australian sleep clinic population. These findings would have important implications for use in the pre-operative screening of obstructive sleep apnoea.
METHODS: We enrolled participants referred for overnight diagnostic polysomnography. The STOP-BANG questionnaire was administered and the B-APNEIC score was extracted. The primary outcome was the predictive ability of a B-APNEIC score ≥ 3 to detect severe obstructive sleep apnoea. Performance metrics were compared with a STOP-BANG score ≥ 5.
RESULTS: Among 274 patients, the B-APNEIC score showed a sensitivity of 84% (95%CI 75-90%), specificity of 60% (95%CI 52-67%), positive predictive value of 56% (95%CI 48-64%) and negative predictive value of 86% (95%CI 78-91%) for predicting severe obstructive sleep apnoea. Compared with the STOP-BANG score, the B-APNEIC score showed superior sensitivity (84% vs. 73%); positive predictive value (56% vs. 52%); negative predictive value (86% vs. 78%); Youden Index (0.43 vs. 0.32); and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (0.72 (95%CI 0.66-0.77) vs. 0.66 (95%CI 0.60-0.72); p = 0.02). Both scores had similar specificity (59%).
DISCUSSION: The B-APNEIC score showed strong predictive accuracy for severe obstructive sleep apnoea and could serve as a simple, objective alternative to STOP-BANG. While further validation in surgical populations is warranted, these findings support its use in pre-operative screening for obstructive sleep apnoea.
METHODS: We enrolled participants referred for overnight diagnostic polysomnography. The STOP-BANG questionnaire was administered and the B-APNEIC score was extracted. The primary outcome was the predictive ability of a B-APNEIC score ≥ 3 to detect severe obstructive sleep apnoea. Performance metrics were compared with a STOP-BANG score ≥ 5.
RESULTS: Among 274 patients, the B-APNEIC score showed a sensitivity of 84% (95%CI 75-90%), specificity of 60% (95%CI 52-67%), positive predictive value of 56% (95%CI 48-64%) and negative predictive value of 86% (95%CI 78-91%) for predicting severe obstructive sleep apnoea. Compared with the STOP-BANG score, the B-APNEIC score showed superior sensitivity (84% vs. 73%); positive predictive value (56% vs. 52%); negative predictive value (86% vs. 78%); Youden Index (0.43 vs. 0.32); and area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (0.72 (95%CI 0.66-0.77) vs. 0.66 (95%CI 0.60-0.72); p = 0.02). Both scores had similar specificity (59%).
DISCUSSION: The B-APNEIC score showed strong predictive accuracy for severe obstructive sleep apnoea and could serve as a simple, objective alternative to STOP-BANG. While further validation in surgical populations is warranted, these findings support its use in pre-operative screening for obstructive sleep apnoea.