-
Respiratory Care Feb 2022Artificial airway suctioning is a key component of airway management and a core skill for clinicians charged with assuring airway patency. Suctioning of the artificial...
Artificial airway suctioning is a key component of airway management and a core skill for clinicians charged with assuring airway patency. Suctioning of the artificial airway is a common procedure performed worldwide on a daily basis. As such, it is imperative that clinicians are familiar with the most-effective and efficient methods to perform the procedure. We conducted a systematic review to assist in the development of evidence-based recommendations that pertain to the care of patients with artificial airways. From our systematic review, we developed guidelines and recommendations that addressed questions related to the indications, complications, timing, duration, and methods of artificial airway suctioning. By using a modified version of the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method, the following recommendations for suctioning were developed for neonatal, pediatric, and adult patients with an artificial airway: (1) breath sounds, visual secretions in the artificial airway, and a sawtooth pattern on the ventilator waveform are indicators for suctioning pediatric and adult patients, and an acute increase in airway resistance may be an indicator for suctioning in neonates; (2) as-needed only, rather than scheduled, suctioning is sufficient for neonatal and pediatric patients; (3) both closed and open suction systems may be used to safely and effectively remove secretions from the artificial airway of adult patients; (4) preoxygenation should be performed before suctioning in pediatric and adult patients; (5) the use of normal saline solution should generally be avoided during suctioning; (6) during open suctioning, sterile technique should be used; (7) suction catheters should occlude < 70% of the endotracheal tube lumen in neonates and < 50% in pediatric and adult patients, and suction pressure should be kept below -120 mm Hg in neonatal and pediatric patients and -200 mm Hg in adult patients; (8) suction should be applied for a maximum of 15 s per suctioning procedure; (9) deep suctioning should only be used when shallow suctioning is ineffective; (10) routine bronchoscopy for secretion removal is not recommended; and (11) devices used to clear endotracheal tubes may be used when airway resistance is increased due to secretion accumulation.
Topics: Adult; Airway Management; Child; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Intubation, Intratracheal; Respiration, Artificial; Suction; Ventilators, Mechanical
PubMed: 35078900
DOI: 10.4187/respcare.09548 -
Journal of Oral Rehabilitation Aug 2021Chin tuck against resistance (CTAR) exercise has been recently reported to be a new therapeutic exercise method that can help improve swallowing function in patients... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Chin tuck against resistance (CTAR) exercise has been recently reported to be a new therapeutic exercise method that can help improve swallowing function in patients with dysphagia. However, due to the differences in exercise protocols, methods and the tools used across studies of CTAR exercise, an overall systematic review of these studies is necessary.
OBJECTIVE
The present study investigated the exercise protocols, methods and tools used in various studies of CTAR exercise and summarised their findings.
METHODS
We searched for studies related to CTAR exercise using electronic databases and selected nine articles for review. The articles were categorised on the basis of four criteria: study design and quality, training protocol, outcome measures and clinical effect.
RESULTS
Four articles reported that CTAR exercise not only helped activate the suprahyoid muscle in healthy adults, but also activated the sternocleidomastoid muscle less than Shaker exercise. In addition, five articles reported that CTAR exercise was effective in improving swallowing function and oral diet stage in the pharyngeal phase, including reduction of airway aspiration in patients with dysphagia after stroke.
CONCLUSIONS
CTAR exercise more selectively activates the suprahyoid muscle and is an effective therapeutic exercise for improving swallowing function in patients with dysphagia. Because it is less strenuous than Shaker exercise, it requires less physical burden and effort, allowing greater compliance.
Topics: Adult; Chin; Deglutition; Deglutition Disorders; Exercise Therapy; Humans; Resistance Training
PubMed: 33973284
DOI: 10.1111/joor.13181 -
Cureus Nov 2023Nasal congestion is a common issue stemming from various factors such as allergies and anatomical variations. Allergic rhinitis frequently leads to nasal congestion. The... (Review)
Review
Nasal congestion is a common issue stemming from various factors such as allergies and anatomical variations. Allergic rhinitis frequently leads to nasal congestion. The pathophysiology involves inflammation, swelling, and mucus production in the nasal mucosa. Multiple treatments are available, including oral phenylephrine, an over-the-counter or prescription option. However, the effectiveness and safety of phenylephrine have been subjects of debate. This systematic review aims to provide an updated perspective on the efficacy of oral phenylephrine versus placebo in addressing nasal congestion in adults. We conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 guidelines, a systematic review involving searches on PubMed, Cochrane, and Scopus databases. Inclusion/exclusion criteria were defined to identify high-quality studies. The focus was on randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and case-control studies published in English between 1998 and 2023, involving adult populations. The interventions compared oral phenylephrine with placebo or standard care, with outcomes centering on changes in nasal congestion symptoms and nasal airway resistance. We identified four articles that met the criteria. These studies exhibited varied designs and populations. The findings consistently indicated that phenylephrine was not more effective than a placebo in relieving nasal congestion. This systematic review demonstrates that oral phenylephrine did not offer substantial relief from nasal congestion compared to a placebo in adults. The studies featured diverse designs, yet the prevailing conclusion was that phenylephrine's efficacy was limited. Safety assessments showed no life-threatening adverse events, with common side effects including headaches and mild discomfort. In summary, this systematic review indicates that oral phenylephrine is not significantly more effective than a placebo in alleviating nasal congestion in adults. Clinicians should explore alternative treatment options, considering the review's limitations. Additional research may be needed to clarify the role of oral phenylephrine in managing nasal congestion.
PubMed: 38125218
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.49074 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2022Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a significant cause of hospitalisation and death in young children. Positioning and mechanical ventilation have been... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is a significant cause of hospitalisation and death in young children. Positioning and mechanical ventilation have been regularly used to reduce respiratory distress and improve oxygenation in hospitalised patients. Due to the association of prone positioning (lying on the abdomen) with sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS) within the first six months, it is recommended that young infants be placed on their back (supine). However, prone positioning may be a non-invasive way of increasing oxygenation in individuals with acute respiratory distress, and offers a more significant survival advantage in those who are mechanically ventilated. There are substantial differences in respiratory mechanics between adults and infants. While the respiratory tract undergoes significant development within the first two years of life, differences in airway physiology between adults and children become less prominent by six to eight years old. However, there is a reduced risk of SIDS during artificial ventilation in hospitalised infants. Thus, an updated review focusing on positioning for infants and young children with ARDS is warranted. This is an update of a review published in 2005, 2009, and 2012.
OBJECTIVES
To compare the effects of different body positions in hospitalised infants and children with acute respiratory distress syndrome aged between four weeks and 16 years.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, which contains the Acute Respiratory Infections Group's Specialised Register, MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL from January 2004 to July 2021.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi-RCTs comparing two or more positions for the management of infants and children hospitalised with ARDS.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two review authors independently extracted data from each study. We resolved differences by consensus, or referred to a third contributor to arbitrate. We analysed bivariate outcomes using an odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence interval (CI). We analysed continuous outcomes using a mean difference (MD) and 95% CI. We used a fixed-effect model, unless heterogeneity was significant (I statistic > 50%), when we used a random-effects model.
MAIN RESULTS
We included six trials: four cross-over trials, and two parallel randomised trials, with 198 participants aged between 4 weeks and 16 years, all but 15 of whom were mechanically ventilated. Four trials compared prone to supine positions. One trial compared the prone position to good-lung dependent (where the person lies on the side of the healthy lung, e.g. if the right lung was healthy, they were made to lie on the right side), and independent (or non-good-lung independent, where the person lies on the opposite side to the healthy lung, e.g. if the right lung was healthy, they were made to lie on the left side) position. One trial compared good-lung independent to good-lung dependent positions. When the prone (with ventilators) and supine positions were compared, there was no information on episodes of apnoea or mortality due to respiratory events. There was no conclusive result in oxygen saturation (SaO MD 0.40 mmHg, 95% CI -1.22 to 2.66; 1 trial, 30 participants; very low certainty evidence); blood gases, PCO (MD 3.0 mmHg, 95% CI -1.93 to 7.93; 1 trial, 99 participants; low certainty evidence), or PO (MD 2 mmHg, 95% CI -5.29 to 9.29; 1 trial, 99 participants; low certainty evidence); or lung function (PaO/FiO ratio; MD 28.16 mmHg, 95% CI -9.92 to 66.24; 2 trials, 121 participants; very low certainty evidence). However, there was an improvement in oxygenation index (FiO% X M/ PaO) with prone positioning in both the parallel trials (MD -2.42, 95% CI -3.60 to -1.25; 2 trials, 121 participants; very low certainty evidence), and the cross-over study (MD -8.13, 95% CI -15.01 to -1.25; 1 study, 20 participants). Derived indices of respiratory mechanics, such as tidal volume, respiratory rate, and positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) were reported. There was an apparent decrease in tidal volume between prone and supine groups in a parallel study (MD -0.60, 95% CI -1.05 to -0.15; 1 study, 84 participants; very low certainty evidence). When prone and supine positions were compared in a cross-over study, there were no conclusive results in respiratory compliance (MD 0.07, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.24; 1 study, 10 participants); changes in PEEP (MD -0.70 cm HO, 95% CI -2.72 to 1.32; 1 study, 10 participants); or resistance (MD -0.00, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.04; 1 study, 10 participants). One study reported adverse events. There were no conclusive results for potential harm between groups in extubation (OR 0.57, 95% CI 0.13 to 2.54; 1 trial, 102 participants; very low certainty evidence); obstructions of the endotracheal tube (OR 5.20, 95% CI 0.24 to 111.09; 1 trial, 102 participants; very low certainty evidence); pressure ulcers (OR 1.00, 95% CI 0.41 to 2.44; 1 trial, 102 participants; very low certainty evidence); and hypercapnia (high levels of arterial carbon dioxide; OR 3.06, 95% CI 0.12 to 76.88; 1 trial, 102 participants; very low certainty evidence). One study (50 participants) compared supine positions to good-lung dependent and independent positions. There was no conclusive evidence that PaO was different between supine and good-lung dependent positioning (MD 3.44 mm Hg, 95% CI -23.12 to 30.00; 1 trial, 25 participants; very low certainty evidence). There was also no conclusive evidence for supine position and good-lung independent positioning (MD -2.78 mmHg, 95% CI -28.84, 23.28; 25 participants; very low certainty evidence); or between good-lung dependent and independent positioning (MD 6.22, 95% CI -21.25 to 33.69; 1 trial, 25 participants; very low certainty evidence). As most trials did not describe how possible biases were addressed, the potential for bias in these findings is unclear.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Although included studies suggest that prone positioning may offer some advantage, there was little evidence to make definitive recommendations. There appears to be low certainty evidence that positioning improves oxygenation in mechanically ventilated children with ARDS. Due to the increased risk of SIDS with prone positioning and lung injury with artificial ventilation, it is recommended that hospitalised infants and children should only be placed in this position while under continuous cardiorespiratory monitoring.
Topics: Adult; Child; Child, Preschool; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Patient Positioning; Positive-Pressure Respiration; Respiration, Artificial; Respiratory Distress Syndrome; Sudden Infant Death
PubMed: 35661343
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD003645.pub4 -
Minerva Medica Oct 2021Asthma is a complex disorder characterized by expiratory airflow limitation, wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough, which can vary over time and in...
INTRODUCTION
Asthma is a complex disorder characterized by expiratory airflow limitation, wheeze, shortness of breath, chest tightness and cough, which can vary over time and in intensity. Being highly heterogeneous, asthma was characterized and classified in several asthma phenotypes and endotypes from 1947 until today. The present systematic review aims to summarize and describe evidence that was published in the last ten years in the field of asthma phenotyping and endotyping.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
The systematic review resumed high-quality evidence (clinical trials and randomized control trials) retrieved on MEDLINE and EMBASE databanks and involving adult asthmatic populations. Analyses of literature were conducted according to PRISMA and CASP guidelines.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Querying MEDLINE and EMBASE databanks, 5019 and 12261 entries were retrieved, respectively. Applying limitations for year of publication, age of participants, and type of publication, the search results were reduced to 98 and 132 articles, respectively. After data abstraction and resolution of duplications, only 50 articles were further evaluated. The research products were then classified first in macro-areas of interest (phenotypes or endotypes) and then in detailed micro-areas.
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review overviews the principal findings available from high-quality literature in the last decade concerning asthma phenotypes and endotypes. Asthma has been described from different points of view, characterizing symptoms, microbiota composition, comorbidities, viral infections, and airway and/or systemic inflammatory status. The comprehension of precise mechanisms underlying asthma pathogenesis is thereby the basis for the development of novel therapeutic strategies, likely essential to the development of precision medicine.
Topics: Adult; Age Factors; Asthma; Biological Products; Clinical Trials as Topic; Comorbidity; Cough; Disease Progression; Drug Resistance; Humans; Microbiota; Obesity; Phenotype; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Respiratory Sounds; Sputum; Steroids; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33969960
DOI: 10.23736/S0026-4806.21.07498-X -
Cureus Jul 2023Airway suctioning is routinely performed in the majority of care circumstances, including acute care, subacute care, home-based settings, and long-term care. Using an... (Review)
Review
Airway suctioning is routinely performed in the majority of care circumstances, including acute care, subacute care, home-based settings, and long-term care. Using an artificial airway to suction the patient allows for the mobilization and evacuation of secretions. When a patient can't independently remove all of the secretions from their respiratory tract, suction is used. This can occur when the body produces excessive secretion or it is not eliminated quickly enough, causing the respiratory system's upper and lower respiratory secretions to accumulate. Airway blockage and inadequate breathing may result from this. Ultimately, this leads to a shortage of oxygen and carbon dioxide from the air, both of which are necessary for ideal cellular activity. Artificial airway suctioning is one of the most crucial components of airway care and a core competency for medical professionals trying to ensure airway patency. Artificial airway suctioning is a standard treatment carried out every day globally and is frequently done in both outpatient and inpatient patients. Therefore, specialists must know the safest and most efficient ways to perform surgery and any potential side effects. In ventilated infants and children, the removal of obstructive secretions by endotracheal suctioning is frequently done. It is unknown how suctioning affects the mechanics of breathing. This study used a prospective observational clinical design to examine the immediate impact of airway resistance in endotracheal suctioning, tidal volume, and dynamic lung regulation in mechanically ventilated adult patients and mechanically ventilated pediatric patients. The preparation, process, and indications for intraoperative fusion treatment in various circumstances are covered in this systematic review.
PubMed: 37641766
DOI: 10.7759/cureus.42579 -
The Laryngoscope Jan 2022Nasal diseases are among the main motives for the early discontinuation of continuous positive airway pressure therapy and for long-term therapeutic compliance with... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVE
Nasal diseases are among the main motives for the early discontinuation of continuous positive airway pressure therapy and for long-term therapeutic compliance with mandibular advancement device. Although our clinical experience leads us to the belief that recumbency impacts nasal airflow in some patient populations, there is no consensus regarding the magnitude of this effect and the specific group of patients who are the most affected by this condition. In this study, we conducted a meta-analysis to assess the effect of the recumbent position on nasal resistance and nasal airflow.
REVIEW METHODS
PubMed (Medline), Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Scopus, and SciELO databases were checked for relevant studies by two members of the YO-IFOS study group. The two authors extracted the data. The main outcome was expressed as the difference between nasal resistance and nasal airflow before and after recumbency.
RESULTS
Nine studies with a total population of 291 individuals were included in the meta-analysis for nasal resistance after recumbency. We found a statistically significant difference in nasal airway resistance of -0.18 Pa sec/cm as compared to before and after recumbency through rhinomanometry (RMM) analysis. A subgroup analysis revealed a variation of -0.20 Pa sec/cm for patients with snoring or sleep apnea and - 0.10 Pa sec/cm for healthy individuals. Regarding nasal airflow measured with RMM, three studies (n = 32) in asymptomatic controls revealed a statistically significant difference of 47.33 ml/sec.
CONCLUSIONS
Recumbency increases nasal resistance and diminishes nasal airflow. This finding is of utmost importance in snorers and sleep apnea patients. Laryngoscope, 132:6-16, 2022.
Topics: Airway Resistance; Humans; Nasal Cavity; Supine Position
PubMed: 33720430
DOI: 10.1002/lary.29509 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Aug 2021Croup is an acute viral respiratory infection with upper airway mucosal inflammation that may cause respiratory distress. Most cases are mild. Moderate to severe croup... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Croup is an acute viral respiratory infection with upper airway mucosal inflammation that may cause respiratory distress. Most cases are mild. Moderate to severe croup may require treatment with corticosteroids (the benefits of which are often delayed) and nebulised epinephrine (adrenaline) (the benefits of which may be short-lived and which can cause dose-related adverse effects including tachycardia, arrhythmias, and hypertension). Rarely, croup results in respiratory failure necessitating emergency intubation and ventilation. A mixture of helium and oxygen (heliox) may prevent morbidity and mortality in ventilated neonates by reducing the viscosity of the inhaled air. It is currently used during emergency transport of children with severe croup. Anecdotal evidence suggests that it relieves respiratory distress. This review updates versions published in 2010, 2013, and 2018.
OBJECTIVES
To examine the effect of heliox compared to oxygen or other active interventions, placebo, or no treatment on relieving signs and symptoms in children with croup as determined by a croup score and rates of admission and intubation.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, which includes the Cochrane Acute Respiratory Infections Group Specialised Register, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, Web of Science, and LILACS, on 15 April 2021. We also searched the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (apps.who.int/trialsearch/) and ClinicalTrials.gov (clinicaltrials.gov) on 15 April 2021. We contacted the British Oxygen Company, a leading supplier of heliox.
SELECTION CRITERIA
Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs comparing the effect of heliox in comparison with placebo, no treatment, or any active intervention(s) in children with croup.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. Data that could not be pooled for statistical analysis were reported descriptively.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 3 RCTs involving a total of 91 children aged between 6 months and 4 years. Study duration was from 7 to 16 months, and all studies were conducted in emergency departments. Two studies were conducted in the USA and one in Spain. Heliox was administered as a mixture of 70% heliox and 30% oxygen. Risk of bias was low in two studies and high in one study because of its open-label design. We did not identify any new trials for this 2021 update. One study of 15 children with mild croup compared heliox with 30% humidified oxygen administered for 20 minutes. There may be no difference in croup score changes between groups at 20 minutes (mean difference (MD) -0.83, 95% confidence interval (CI) -2.36 to 0.70) (Westley croup score, scale range 0 to 16). The mean croup score at 20 minutes postintervention may not differ between groups (MD -0.57, 95% CI -1.46 to 0.32). There may be no difference between groups in mean respiratory rate (MD 6.40, 95% CI -1.38 to 14.18) and mean heart rate (MD 14.50, 95% CI -8.49 to 37.49) at 20 minutes. The evidence for all outcomes in this comparison was of low certainty, downgraded for serious imprecision. All children were discharged, but information on hospitalisation, intubation, or re-presenting to emergency departments was not reported. In another study, 47 children with moderate croup received one dose of oral dexamethasone (0.3 mg/kg) with either heliox for 60 minutes or no treatment. Heliox may slightly improve Taussig croup scores (scale range 0 to 15) at 60 minutes postintervention (MD -1.10, 95% CI -1.96 to -0.24), but there may be no difference between groups at 120 minutes (MD -0.70, 95% CI -1.56 to 0.16). Children treated with heliox may have lower mean Taussig croup scores at 60 minutes (MD -1.11, 95% CI -2.05 to -0.17) but not at 120 minutes (MD -0.71, 95% CI -1.72 to 0.30). Children treated with heliox may have lower mean respiratory rates at 60 minutes (MD -4.94, 95% CI -9.66 to -0.22), but there may be no difference at 120 minutes (MD -3.17, 95% CI -7.83 to 1.49). There may be a difference in hospitalisation rates between groups (odds ratio 0.46, 95% CI 0.04 to 5.41). We assessed the evidence for all outcomes in this comparison as of low certainty, downgraded due to imprecision and high risk of bias related to an open-label design. Information on heart rate and intubation was not reported. In the third study, 29 children with moderate to severe croup all received continuous cool mist and intramuscular dexamethasone (0.6 mg/kg). They were then randomised to receive either heliox (given as a mixture of 70% helium and 30% oxygen) plus one to two doses of nebulised saline or 100% oxygen plus nebulised epinephrine (adrenaline), with gas therapy administered continuously for three hours. Heliox may slightly improve croup scores at 90 minutes postintervention, but may result in little or no difference overall using repeated-measures analysis. We assessed the evidence for all outcomes in this comparison as of low certainty, downgraded due to high risk of bias related to inadequate reporting. Information on hospitalisation or re-presenting to the emergency department was not reported. The included studies did not report on adverse events, intensive care admissions, or parental anxiety. We could not pool the available data because each comparison included data from only one study.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Given the very limited available evidence, uncertainty remains regarding the effectiveness and safety of heliox. Heliox may not be more effective than 30% humidified oxygen for children with mild croup, but may be beneficial in the short term for children with moderate croup treated with dexamethasone. The effect of heliox may be similar to 100% oxygen given with one or two doses of adrenaline. Adverse events were not reported, and it is unclear if these were monitored in the included studies. Adequately powered RCTs comparing heliox with standard treatments are needed to further assess the role of heliox in the treatment of children with moderate to severe croup.
Topics: Airway Obstruction; Airway Resistance; Child; Child, Preschool; Croup; Helium; Humans; Infant; Oxygen; Oxygen Inhalation Therapy; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34397099
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD006822.pub6 -
American Journal of Otolaryngology 2021Upper airway resistance syndrome (UARS) is a sleep related breathing disorder that was first described in 1993. This goal of this study is to determine the efficacy of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
PURPOSE
Upper airway resistance syndrome (UARS) is a sleep related breathing disorder that was first described in 1993. This goal of this study is to determine the efficacy of surgical intervention for UARS.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Systematic review of the literature and a case series of UARS patients at a large integrated healthcare system. Meta-analysis was performed.
RESULTS
For the systematic review, 971 abstracts were reviewed and 3 articles were included, yielding 49 subjects. All of the included studies were of level 3 or 4 evidence. Significant improvement in Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) score was noted after surgery in two level 4 studies. No significant change in ESS was noted in one level 3 study. Our retrospective chart review of eleven UARS patients compared preoperative and postoperative ESS scores, as well as sleep study data. Patients underwent a variety of surgical procedures. Our findings show a significant improvement in mean ESS scores after surgery, from 11.0 (±3.5) to 7.0 (±4.8) with p = 0.01, though no difference in apnea hypopnea index (AHI) and respiratory disturbance index (RDI) were identified. Meta-analysis was performed on 2 studies from the systematic review and our cases series data. UARS surgery showed a mean change in ESS of -5.89 (95% CI, -8.29 to -3.50).
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review, meta-analysis and retrospective case series indicate that surgery may improve ESS scores in patients with UARS. AHI and RDI are unlikely to be impacted by surgery.
Topics: Adult; Airway Resistance; Female; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Otorhinolaryngologic Surgical Procedures; Retrospective Studies; Sleep Apnea Syndromes; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33831820
DOI: 10.1016/j.amjoto.2021.103011 -
Archivos de Bronconeumologia Jun 2023Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) is the most effective therapy for symptomatic obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA). However, uncertainty remains about the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
Effect of Continuous Positive Airway Pressure on Glucose and Lipid Profiles in Patients With Obstructive Sleep Apnoea: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.
BACKGROUND AND AIM
Continuous Positive Airway Pressure (CPAP) is the most effective therapy for symptomatic obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA). However, uncertainty remains about the effectiveness of CPAP in improving OSA-related metabolic dysregulation. This meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) aimed to investigate whether CPAP, compared to other control treatments, could improve glucose or lipid metabolism in OSA patients.
METHODS
Relevant articles were searched in three different databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE and Web of Science) from inception to 6th Feb 2022 through specific search terms and selection criteria.
RESULTS
From a total of 5553 articles, 31 RCTs were included. CPAP modestly improved insulin sensitivity as determined by mean fasting plasma insulin and Homeostasis Model Assessment of Insulin Resistance reduction of 1.33mU/L and 0.287, respectively. In subgroup analyses pre-diabetic/type 2 diabetic patients as well as those with sleepy OSA showed a greater response to CPAP. Regarding lipid metabolism, CPAP was associated with a mean total cholesterol reduction of 0.064mmol/L. In subgroup analyses, the benefit was higher in patients that showed more severe OSA and oxygen desaturations at the baseline sleep study as well as in younger and obese subjects. Neither glycated haemoglobin nor triglycerides, HDL- and LDL-cholesterol were reduced by CPAP.
CONCLUSION
CPAP treatment may improve insulin sensitivity and total cholesterol levels in OSA patients but with low effect size. Our results suggest that CPAP does not substantially improve metabolic derangements in an unselected OSA population, but the effect may be higher in specific subgroups of OSA patients.
Topics: Humans; Insulin Resistance; Glucose; Continuous Positive Airway Pressure; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Triglycerides; Sleep Apnea, Obstructive; Cholesterol
PubMed: 37024342
DOI: 10.1016/j.arbres.2023.03.012