0898 The Accuracy Of Split-night Study In Assessing Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA) In Children And Adolescents

Introduction

Split-night polysomnography (PSG) can be used for the diagnosis of OSA, if clinically appropriate, per AASM recommendation based on adult data. However, there are limited data in pediatric population. The aim of our study is to assess the accuracy of split-night-PSG compared with a full-night-PSG in children with OSA.

Methods

A retrospective review was performed in children and adolescents who were diagnosed with OSA during a diagnostic PSG (oAHI >1). Sleep and respiratory parameters from the full-night-PSG(F) were compared with the first three hours of the same PSG(S). Subgroup analysis was performed for age and OSA severity. The results were reported as mean±SD. All variables were compared with paired T-test.

Results

226 met the criteria for entry into analysis. The mean age was 7.8y±5.8. For the whole cohort, there were no significant differences in the mean AHI and oAHI [7.3±11.7(F)vs6.9±13.9(S),p=0.26] between full-night and split-night studies. Subgroup analysis revealed that children aged 2-12 yo (n=120) had significant differences in the mean AHI [6.1±7.1(F)vs4.8±6.4(S)p=0.002] and the mean oAHI [4.8±5.6(F)vs3.9±5.4(S)p=0.03]. In addition, subgroup analysis of mild OSA (n=137) showed a significant difference in the mean AHI (p=0.006), but not in the mean oAHI (p=0.08). There were no significant differences in the mean AHI and oAHI in the moderate to severe OSA group. Based on the first 3 hours of PSG, 16.8%(n=38) of patients were inaccurately classified to have no OSA, while the severity was misclassified in 37.6%(n=85) of patients (underestimated in 30%(n=68) and overestimated in 7.5%(n=17)).

Conclusion

Although there were no differences in the mean AHI and oAHI, split-night-PSG misclassified diagnosis and severity in a significant proportion of our pediatric cohort. In addition, the accuracy of split-night-PSG is influenced by age and severity of OSA. Further studies are needed to identify factors that play a role in these differences.

Support

Cincinnati Children’s Hospital, Children’s Foundation

Therapeutic equivalence of the generic and the reference atorvastatin in patients with increased coronary risk

AIM

Generic drugs are more and more frequently used instead of originators. However, uncertainty exists with respect to therapeutic equivalence of generic product with originator one. Therefore, in this study efficacy and safety of generic atorvastatin was compared to reference product. In patients with increased low density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) levels of cholesterol and changes of total coronary risk were followed.

METHODS

A randomized, double-blind, multicenter parallel study was carried out in 22 centers. The study included 148 subjects with LDL-C higher than 3 mmol/L and increased coronary risk (>9.5% in 10 years calculated according to PROCAM algorithm). After a four-week placebo run-in period, patients were randomly assigned to receive the generic or the reference atorvastatin for 12 weeks. The initial dose of the drugs was 10 mg or 20 mg depending on the baseline LDL-C value. After six weeks the dose was increased to 20 mg or 40 mg in patients who had not reached the target LDL-C value of 2.99 mmol/L.

RESULTS

Altogether 117 patients have been analysed in the per-protocol analysis. The GA was proven to be equally effective to the reference product as shown by the significantly equal reduction in LDL-C (GA: 37.8%, RA: 38.4%, P=NS) using the non-inferiority statistical analysis. Also other lipid parameters were significantly lowered by both drugs with the exception of HDL-C. Both drugs significantly reduced absolute coronary risk by 13% and 13.3% for the generic and the reference atorvastatin, respectively. Systolic blood pressure was also significantly reduced by approximately 10 mmHg in both study groups. Both products had similar adverse events profile. No cases of therapy withdrawal due to safety were recorded.

CONCLUSION

Both the generic and the reference atorvastatin were equally effective in correcting the lipid profile and reducing calculated absolute coronary risk in patients with hyperlipidemia and increased coronary risk. Both treatments were equally well tolerated.

Filling hemodialysis catheters in the interdialytic period: heparin versus citrate versus polygeline: a prospective randomized study

Heparin and saline are commonly used to fill hemodialysis central venous catheters to prevent their thrombosis during the interdialytic period. The purpose of this prospective clinical study was to evaluate whether replacing heparin with citrate or polygeline could ensure satisfactory catheter function without exposing patients to the risk of systemic heparinization. Thirty end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients with subclavian or jugular single lumen catheters as temporary vascular access for hemodialysis were enrolled. After the insertion of the catheters, the patients were randomly assigned to one of the following three filling groups: Group A, heparin; Group B, citrate; Group C, polygeline. Before each dialysis, the filling solution was aspirated and clot volume, if present, was measured. The catheter usage time and the clot volume were 23 +/- 24 days and 0.052 +/- 0.035 ml in Group A, 51 +/- 36 days and 0.059 +/- 0.032 ml in Group B, and 32 +/- 10 days and 0.056 +/- 0.038 ml in Group C, respectively. Our results indicate that citrate or polygeline can replace heparin effectively as a filling solution for single lumen temporary hemodialysis catheters.