Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25766708›Full record

ArticleJournal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine2015

All APAPs Are Not Equivalent for the Treatment of Sleep Disordered Breathing: A Bench Evaluation of Eleven Commercially Available Devices.

Kaixian Zhu, Gabriel Roisman, Sami Aouf, Pierre Escourrou

Abstract readComparative StudyEvaluation Study
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Treatment of Adult Obstructive Sleep Apnea With Positive Airway Pressure: An American Academy of Sleep Medicine Systematic Review, Meta-Analysis, and GRADE Assessment.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2019
    Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Use of the WatchPAT to detect occult residual sleep-disordered breathing in patients on CPAP for obstructive sleep apnea.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2020
    Article
  14. Sudden Improvement in PAP Download Indices Without Treatment Change.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2019
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Pressure-Relief Features of Fixed and Autotitrating Continuous Positive Airway Pressure May Impair Their Efficacy: Evaluation with a Respiratory Bench Model.Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine · 2016
    Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Kaixian ZhuAir Liquide Healthcare, Gentilly, France.
Gabriel RoismanSleep Disorders Center, AP-HP Antoine-Béclère Hospital, Clamart, France.
Sami AoufAir Liquide Healthcare, Gentilly, France.
Pierre EscourrouSleep Disorders Center, AP-HP Antoine-Béclère Hospital, Clamart, France.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

STUDY

objectivesThis study challenged on a bench-test the efficacy of auto-titrating positive airway pressure (APAP) devices for obstructive sleep disordered breathing treatment and evaluated the accuracy of the device reports.

methodsOur bench consisted of an active lung simulator and a Starling resistor. Eleven commercially available APAP devices were evaluated on their reactions to single-type SDB sequences (obstructive apnea and hypopnea, central apnea, and snoring), and to a long general breathing scenario (5.75 h) simulating various SDB during four sleep cycles and to a short scenario (95 min) simulating one sleep cycle.

resultsIn the single-type sequence of 30-minute repetitive obstructive apneas, only 5 devices normalized the airflow (> 70% of baseline breathing amplitude). Similarly, normalized breathing was recorded with 8 devices only for a 20-min obstructive hypopnea sequence. Five devices increased the pressure in response to snoring. Only 4 devices maintained a constant minimum pressure when subjected to repeated central apneas with an open upper airway. In the long general breathing scenario, the pressure responses and the treatment efficacy differed among devices: only 5 devices obtained a residual obstructive AHI < 5/h. During the short general breathing scenario, only 2 devices reached the same treatment efficacy (p < 0.001), and 3 devices underestimated the AHI by > 10% (p < 0.001). The long scenario led to more consistent device reports.

conclusionLarge differences between APAP devices in the treatment efficacy and the accuracy of report were evidenced in the current study.

Indexed as

AutomationBenchmarkingEquipment DesignEquipment Failure AnalysisEquipment SafetyHumansPositive-Pressure RespirationReproducibility of ResultsSleep Apnea, CentralSleep Apnea, ObstructiveSleep Apnea Syndromesauto-titrating continuous positive airway pressurebench testcentral sleep apneadevice reportobstructive sleep apnea

Identifiers

PMID25766708
PMCPMC4481055

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.