Functional Role of Neural Injury in Obstructive Sleep Apnea

The causes of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) are multifactorial. Neural injury affecting the upper airway muscles due to repetitive exposure to intermittent hypoxia and/or mechanical strain resulting from snoring and recurrent upper airway closure have been proposed to contribute to OSA disease progression. Multiple studies have demonstrated altered sensory and motor function in patients with OSA using a variety of neurophysiological and histological approaches. However, the extent to which the alterations contribute to impairments in upper airway muscle function, and thus OSA disease progression, remains uncertain. This brief review, primarily focused on data in humans, summarizes: (1) the evidence for upper airway sensorimotor injury in OSA and (2) current understanding of how these changes affect upper airway function and their potential to change OSA progression. Some unresolved questions including possible treatment targets are noted

The effects of hypoxia on respiratory sensation and reflexes in healthy subjects : implications for sleep and respiratory disease

Hypoxia is a common feature of many respiratory disorders including acute severe asthma, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and pneumonia. Hypoxia also occurs during sleep - disordered breathing in conditions such as sleep hypoventilation syndrome and sleep apnea. In most respiratory diseases hypoxia is coupled with increased respiratory load. Compensatory protective mechanisms are activated to oppose these impediments to respiration. However, hypoxia is associated with impaired neurocognitive function and recent studies have demonstrated that hypoxia suppresses respiratory load perception in healthy individuals and asthma patients. These recent findings raise the possibility that a variety of protective physiological reflex responses to increased respiratory load may be impaired during periods of hypoxia. The effects of hypoxia on several of these protective responses and possible mechanisms of respiratory sensory depression by hypoxia are explored in the experiments outlined in this thesis. In the first study, the respiratory related evoked potential ( RREP ) was used to investigate the mechanisms underlying hypoxia - induced suppression of respiratory load sensation in healthy individuals. As a positive control the effects of hypoxia on respiratory load perception to inspiratory resistive loads were also measured. The amplitude of the first and second positive peaks ( P1 and P2 ) of the RREP were significantly reduced during hypoxia. P1 is thought to reflect the arrival of the ascending respiratory signals to the somatosensory area of the cortex. The perceived magnitude of externally applied inspiratory resistive loads was also reduced during hypoxia. These data provide further support that hypoxia suppresses respiratory load perception and suggest that this is mediated, at least in part, by suppression of respiratory afferent information prior to its arrival at the cortex. In the second study, the effects of acute sustained hypoxia on the cough reflex threshold and cough tachyphylaxis to inhaled capsaicin were explored in healthy individuals. Acute sustained hypoxia suppressed cough reflex sensitivity to inhaled capsaicin. This finding raises the possibility that the cough reflex, important for protecting the lungs from inhalation or aspiration of potentially injurious substances and for clearing excess secretions, may be impaired during acute exacerbations of hypoxic - respiratory disease. In the third study, reflex responses of the genioglossus and scalene muscles to brief pulses of negative airway pressure were compared between hypoxia and normoxia during wake and sleep in healthy males in the supine position. Cortical RREPs to the same stimuli were also examined under these conditions. The genioglossus is the largest upper airway ( UA ) dilator muscle and can be reflexively augmented in response to negative UA pressure. A diminished response of this muscle during sleep has been postulated to be a contributing mechanism to obstructive sleep apnea ( OSA ) in individuals with an anatomically narrow UA. Cortical activation ( i.e. arousal ) to sudden airway narrowing in OSA is an important protective response to help restore ventilation during an obstructive event. In this study, genioglossus reflex responses to negative pressure pulse stimuli were maintained during mild overnight hypoxia. Conversely, reflex inhibition of the scalene muscle to the same stimuli was prolonged during hypoxia. In addition, a previously undescribed morphology of the genioglossus negative pressure reflex consisting of activation followed by suppression was observed with greater suppression during sleep than wake. The amplitude of the P2 component of the RREP was also significantly reduced during hypoxia. In summary, the potential mechanisms underlying hypoxia - induced suppression of respiratory load sensation and the effects of hypoxia on several protective respiratory responses have been investigated in healthy subjects. The potential implications of these findings for patients with hypoxic - respiratory disease are discussed.Thesis (Ph.D.)--School of Molecular and Biomedical Science, 2006

Definition, discrimination, diagnosis and treatment of central breathing disturbances during sleep

The complexity of central breathing disturbances during sleep has become increasingly obvious. They present as central sleep apnoeas (CSAs) and hypopnoeas, periodic breathing with apnoeas, or irregular breathing in patients with cardiovascular, other internal or neurological disorders, and can emerge under positive airway pressure treatment or opioid use, or at high altitude. As yet, there is insufficient knowledge on the clinical features, pathophysiological background and consecutive algorithms for stepped-care treatment. Most recently, it has been discussed intensively if CSA in heart failure is a "marker" of disease severity or a "mediator" of disease progression, and if and which type of positive airway pressure therapy is indicated. In addition, disturbances of respiratory drive or the translation of central impulses may result in hypoventilation, associated with cerebral or neuromuscular diseases, or severe diseases of lung or thorax. These statements report the results of an European Respiratory Society Task Force addressing actual diagnostic and therapeutic standards. The statements are based on a systematic review of the literature and a systematic two-step decision process. Although the Task Force does not make recommendations, it describes its current practice of treatment of CSA in heart failure and hypoventilation.status: publishe

Definition, discrimination, diagnosis and treatment of central breathing disturbances during sleep.

The complexity of central breathing disturbances during sleep has become increasingly obvious. They present as central sleep apnoeas (CSAs) and hypopnoeas, periodic breathing with apnoeas, or irregular breathing in patients with cardiovascular, other internal or neurological disorders, and can emerge under positive airway pressure treatment or opioid use, or at high altitude. As yet, there is insufficient knowledge on the clinical features, pathophysiological background and consecutive algorithms for stepped-care treatment. Most recently, it has been discussed intensively if CSA in heart failure is a "marker" of disease severity or a "mediator" of disease progression, and if and which type of positive airway pressure therapy is indicated. In addition, disturbances of respiratory drive or the translation of central impulses may result in hypoventilation, associated with cerebral or neuromuscular diseases, or severe diseases of lung or thorax. These statements report the results of an European Respiratory Society Task Force addressing actual diagnostic and therapeutic standards. The statements are based on a systematic review of the literature and a systematic two-step decision process. Although the Task Force does not make recommendations, it describes its current practice of treatment of CSA in heart failure and hypoventilation

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health

Risk of COVID-19 after natural infection or vaccinationResearch in context

Summary: Background: While vaccines have established utility against COVID-19, phase 3 efficacy studies have generally not comprehensively evaluated protection provided by previous infection or hybrid immunity (previous infection plus vaccination). Individual patient data from US government-supported harmonized vaccine trials provide an unprecedented sample population to address this issue. We characterized the protective efficacy of previous SARS-CoV-2 infection and hybrid immunity against COVID-19 early in the pandemic over three-to six-month follow-up and compared with vaccine-associated protection. Methods: In this post-hoc cross-protocol analysis of the Moderna, AstraZeneca, Janssen, and Novavax COVID-19 vaccine clinical trials, we allocated participants into four groups based on previous-infection status at enrolment and treatment: no previous infection/placebo; previous infection/placebo; no previous infection/vaccine; and previous infection/vaccine. The main outcome was RT-PCR-confirmed COVID-19 >7–15 days (per original protocols) after final study injection. We calculated crude and adjusted efficacy measures. Findings: Previous infection/placebo participants had a 92% decreased risk of future COVID-19 compared to no previous infection/placebo participants (overall hazard ratio [HR] ratio: 0.08; 95% CI: 0.05–0.13). Among single-dose Janssen participants, hybrid immunity conferred greater protection than vaccine alone (HR: 0.03; 95% CI: 0.01–0.10). Too few infections were observed to draw statistical inferences comparing hybrid immunity to vaccine alone for other trials. Vaccination, previous infection, and hybrid immunity all provided near-complete protection against severe disease. Interpretation: Previous infection, any hybrid immunity, and two-dose vaccination all provided substantial protection against symptomatic and severe COVID-19 through the early Delta period. Thus, as a surrogate for natural infection, vaccination remains the safest approach to protection. Funding: National Institutes of Health