These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Hypercapnic stimulation and ventilation response in the syndrome of sleep obstructive apnea. Comparison of reinhalation and steady state].
    Author: Soto Campos JG, Cano Gómez S, Fernández Guerra J, Sánchez Armengol M, Capote Gil F, Castillo Gómez J.
    Journal: Arch Bronconeumol; 1996; 32(7):341-7. PubMed ID: 8963513.
    Abstract:
    The objective of this study was to assess ventilatory response to stimulation with CO2 in patients suffering obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) but without chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), by examining differences between hyper- and normocapnic patients and comparing the results obtained with the usual techniques used to stimulate hypercapnia (rebreathing and stable-state). To this end, we studied 15 obese patients, all with an apnea-hypopnea index greater than 10 from a polysomnograph lasting a full night. The following lung function tests were performed: spirometry, air way resistance measures and static lung volumes by plethysmograph and arterial gasometry. We later analyzed ventilatory response by the stable-state method, with increasing CO2 concentrations (from 1 to 9%) and by the rebreathing method. Results from the two methods were similar for all patients: delta VE/delta PCO2 (0.64 +/- 0.35 vs 0.67 +/- 0.48 l/min/mmHg; p = 0.59), delta Vt/delta PCO2 (28.33 +/- 16.23 vs 26.42 +/- 16.94 ml/mmHg; p = 0.9), delta Vt/Ti/delta PCO2 (28.82 +/- 20.9 vs 29.41 +/- 23.78 ml/s/mmHg; p = 0.89) y delta P0.1/delta PCO2 (0.11 +/- 0.07 vs 0.117 +/- 0.05 cmH2O/mmHg; p = 0.58). We compared the results obtained by the two techniques by dividing the sample into two groups of 7 and 8 patients, respectively, depending on whether PaCO2 level before stimulation was higher or lower than 45 mmHg. The hypercapnic patients (group I) were older (61 +/- 3.5 vs 50 +/- 9 years; p = 0.04) but were not different with respect to body mass from the normocapnic patients (group II) (37.59 +/- 6.4 vs 34.56 +/- 4.75 kg/m2; p = 0.33). The results from the two techniques for stimulating hypercapnia were similar within each group, with a statistically significant decrease (p < 0.03) in patients with daytime hypercapnia in delta VE/delta PCO2 delta Vt/delta PCO2, delta Vt/Ti/delta PCO2 and delta P0.1/delta PCO2. We conclude that there are no differences in the results obtained with the rebreathing and stable state techniques. Likewise, ventilatory response to stimulation with CO2 in individuals with OSAS and daytime hypoventilation is less than of normocapnic patients.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]