Respiratory event index underestimates severity of sleep apnea compared to apnea-hypopnea index

M. Pitkänen, R. K. Nath, H. Korkalainen, Sami Nikkonen, Alaa Mahamid, A. Oksenberg, B. Duce, Juha Töyräs, S. Kainulainen, T. Leppänen
{"title":"Respiratory event index underestimates severity of sleep apnea compared to apnea-hypopnea index","authors":"M. Pitkänen, R. K. Nath, H. Korkalainen, Sami Nikkonen, Alaa Mahamid, A. Oksenberg, B. Duce, Juha Töyräs, S. Kainulainen, T. Leppänen","doi":"10.1093/sleepadvances/zpad054","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Polygraphy (PG) is often used to diagnose obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). However, it does not use electroencephalography (EEG), and therefore cannot estimate sleep time or score arousals and related hypopneas. Consequently, the PG-derived respiratory event index (REI) differs from the polysomnography (PSG) derived apnea-hypopnea index (AHI). In this study, we comprehensively analyzed the differences between AHI and REI. Conventional AHI and REI were calculated based on total sleep time (TST) and total analyzed time (TAT), respectively, from two different PSG datasets (N=1561). Moreover, TAT-based AHI (AHITAT) and TST-based REI (REITST) were calculated. These indices were compared keeping AHI as the gold standard. The REI, AHITAT, and REITST were significantly lower than AHI (p<0.0001, p≤0.002, p≤0.01, respectively). The total classification accuracy of OSA severity based on REI was 42.1% and 72.8% for two datasets. Based on AHITAT the accuracies were 68.4% and 85.9%, and based on REITST they were 65.9% and 88.5% compared to AHI. AHI was most correlated with REITST (r=0.98 and r=0.99 for the datasets) and least with REI (r=0.92 and r=0.97). Compared to AHI, REI had the largest mean absolute error (13.9 and 6.7) and REITST the lowest (5.9 and 1.9). REI had the lowest sensitivity (42.1% and 72.8%) and specificity (80.7% and 90.9%) in both datasets. Based on these present results, REI underestimates AHI. Furthermore, these results indicate that arousal-related hypopneas are an important measure for accurately classifying OSA.","PeriodicalId":21861,"journal":{"name":"SLEEP Advances","volume":"42 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-12-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"SLEEP Advances","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/sleepadvances/zpad054","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Polygraphy (PG) is often used to diagnose obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). However, it does not use electroencephalography (EEG), and therefore cannot estimate sleep time or score arousals and related hypopneas. Consequently, the PG-derived respiratory event index (REI) differs from the polysomnography (PSG) derived apnea-hypopnea index (AHI). In this study, we comprehensively analyzed the differences between AHI and REI. Conventional AHI and REI were calculated based on total sleep time (TST) and total analyzed time (TAT), respectively, from two different PSG datasets (N=1561). Moreover, TAT-based AHI (AHITAT) and TST-based REI (REITST) were calculated. These indices were compared keeping AHI as the gold standard. The REI, AHITAT, and REITST were significantly lower than AHI (p<0.0001, p≤0.002, p≤0.01, respectively). The total classification accuracy of OSA severity based on REI was 42.1% and 72.8% for two datasets. Based on AHITAT the accuracies were 68.4% and 85.9%, and based on REITST they were 65.9% and 88.5% compared to AHI. AHI was most correlated with REITST (r=0.98 and r=0.99 for the datasets) and least with REI (r=0.92 and r=0.97). Compared to AHI, REI had the largest mean absolute error (13.9 and 6.7) and REITST the lowest (5.9 and 1.9). REI had the lowest sensitivity (42.1% and 72.8%) and specificity (80.7% and 90.9%) in both datasets. Based on these present results, REI underestimates AHI. Furthermore, these results indicate that arousal-related hypopneas are an important measure for accurately classifying OSA.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
与呼吸暂停-低通气指数相比,呼吸事件指数低估了睡眠呼吸暂停的严重程度
多导睡眠图(PG)通常用于诊断阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停(OSA)。但是,它不使用脑电图 (EEG),因此无法估计睡眠时间或对觉醒和相关的低通气进行评分。因此,PG 得出的呼吸事件指数(REI)不同于多导睡眠图(PSG)得出的呼吸暂停-低通气指数(AHI)。本研究全面分析了 AHI 和 REI 之间的差异。 传统的 AHI 和 REI 分别根据两个不同 PSG 数据集(N=1561)中的总睡眠时间(TST)和总分析时间(TAT)计算得出。此外,还计算了基于 TAT 的 AHI(AHITAT)和基于 TST 的 REI(REITST)。将 AHI 作为金标准对这些指数进行了比较。 REI、AHITAT和REITST明显低于AHI(分别为p<0.0001、p≤0.002和p≤0.01)。在两个数据集中,基于 REI 的 OSA 严重程度总分类准确率分别为 42.1%和 72.8%。与 AHI 相比,基于 AHITAT 的准确率分别为 68.4% 和 85.9%,基于 REITST 的准确率分别为 65.9% 和 88.5%。AHI 与 REITST 的相关性最高(数据集的 r=0.98 和 r=0.99),与 REI 的相关性最低(r=0.92 和 r=0.97)。与 AHI 相比,REI 的平均绝对误差最大(13.9 和 6.7),REITST 的平均绝对误差最小(5.9 和 1.9)。在两个数据集中,REI 的灵敏度(42.1% 和 72.8%)和特异性(80.7% 和 90.9%)都最低。 根据这些结果,REI 低估了 AHI。此外,这些结果表明,唤醒相关低通气是对 OSA 进行准确分类的重要指标。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
A Central Role of Sulcal Width in the Associations of Sleep Duration and Depression with Cognition in Mid to Late Life Clinical and Financial Significance of Insomnia within a Large Payor-Provider Health System Impact of Real-World Implementation of Evidence-Based Insomnia Treatment within a Large Payor-Provider Health System: Initial Provider and Patient-Level Outcomes Poor Sleep and Inflammatory Gene Expression Among Care Partners of Persons Living with Dementia: A Pilot Trial of a Behavioral Sleep Intervention Sex-Specific Associations Between Habitual Snoring and Cancer Prevalence: Insights from a U.S. Cohort Study
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1