Automatic non-invasive differentiation of obstructive and central hypopneas with nasal airflow compared to esophageal pressure

An Official American Thoracic Society Workshop Report: Noninvasive Identification of Inspiratory Flow Limitation in Sleep Studies

This report summarizes the proceedings of the American Thoracic Society Workshop on the Noninvasive Identification of Inspiratory Flow Limitation in Sleep Studies held on May 16, 2015, in Denver, Colorado. The goal of the workshop was to discuss methods for standardizing the scoring of flow limitation from nasal cannula pressure tracings. The workshop began with presentations on the physiology underlying flow limitation, existing methods of scoring flow limitation, the effects of signal acquisition and filtering on flow shapes, and a review of the literature examining the adverse outcomes related to flow limitation. After these presentations, the results from online scoring exercises, which were crowdsourced to workshop participants in advance of the workshop, were reviewed and discussed. Break-out sessions were then held to discuss potential algorithms for scoring flow limitation. Based on these discussions, subsequent online scoring exercises, and webinars after the workshop, a consensus-based set of recommendations for a scoring algorithm for flow limitation was developed. Key conclusions from the workshop were: (1) a standardized and automated approach to scoring flow limitation is needed to provide a metric of nonepisodic elevated upper airway resistance, which can then be related to clinical outcomes in large cohorts and patient groups; (2) at this time, the most feasible method for standardization is by proposing a consensus-based framework, which includes scoring rules, developed by experts (3) hardware and software settings of acquisition devices, including filter settings, affect the shape of the flow curve, and should be clearly specified; and (4) a priority for future research is the generation of an open-source, expert-derived training set to encourage and support validation of automated flow limitation scoring algorithms.

Relative prolongation of inspiratory time predicts high versus low resistance categorization of hypopneas

STUDY OBJECTIVES

Sleep disordered breathing events conceptually separate into "obstructive" and "central" events. Esophageal manometry is the definitive but invasive means of classifying hypopneas. The purpose of this project was to identify noninvasive markers for discriminating high vs. low resistance hypopneas.

METHODS

Forty subjects with obstructive or central sleep apnea underwent diagnostic polysomnography with nasal cannula airflow and esophageal manometry; 200% resistance relative to reference breaths was used to define "high" resistance. Noninvasive parameters from 292 randomly selected hypopneas in 20 subjects were analyzed and correlated to resistance. The best parameter and cutoff for predicting high relative resistance was determined and tested prospectively in 2 test sets in the 20 remaining subjects. Test Set A: 15 randomly selected hypopneas in each subject; Test Set B: all hypopneas in 7 subjects.

RESULTS

In the development set, prolongation of inspiratory time during the 2 smallest breaths of a hypopnea (T(i)) relative to baseline had the best correlation to high relative resistance. In the Test Set A, relative T(i) > 110% classified obstructive events with sensitivity = 72%, specificity = 77%, PPV = 64%, NPV = 83%. Similar numbers were obtained for classification of hypopneas based on presence of flow limitation (FL) alone. When either relative T(i) or presence of FL were used to define high resistance, sensitivity = 84%, specificity = 74%, PPV = 65%, NPV = 89%. Similar results were obtained for Test Set B.

CONCLUSIONS

Relative prolongation of T(i) is a good noninvasive predictor of high/low resistance in a dataset with both FL and NFL hypopneas. Combination of FL and relative T(i) improves this classification. The use of T(i) to separate obstructive and central hypopneas needs to be further tested for clinical utility (outcomes and treatment effects).