Chest
Clinical InvestigationsSLEEPValidation of the POLY-MESAM Seven-Channel Ambulatory Recording Unit
Section snippets
Materials and Methods
Patients who attended our clinic for sleep-related respiratory disorders and snoring were randomly selected. Those with chronic obstructive lung disease and cardiac insufficiency (New York Heart Association score > 2) were excluded. Fifty-three subjects were recruited and admitted to the hospital, were examined further, and underwent simultaneous polygraphy and polysomnography. For polygraphy, the PM unit was used, and for polysomnography the SIDAS GS system (Stimotron; Wendelstein, Germany)
Results
In general, values recorded by the PM unit were lower than those returned by standard polysomnography. This can be seen in Table 1, which presents data regarding the ODI, AHI, AI, HI, and arousal index (ie, the number of arousals per hour of sleep) in the complete patient group. Raw data for individual patients are presented in Table 2 .
The evaluation of data returned by polysomnography yielded AHI values between 0.2 and 75.9 (mean [± SD], 17.9 ± 18.1). In comparison, findings from polygraphy
Discussion
This study and previous studies comparing level III devices with the “gold standard” of polysomnography suffer from the inherent problem that for study purposes both types of measurement systems are used while being attended in the laboratory. Of course, by definition, level III devices are not designed to be used in this way. Laboratory use may give a false degree of reliability that is not found when used in the home.
In the present study, there was a high degree of correlation between the
Conclusion
The correlation of AHIs using polysomnography and the PM unit is close. However, in some cases, the use of the PM unit results in an underestimation of the AHI. The PM unit produces false-negative results in patients with mild to moderate OSA. Although inpatient polysomnography remains the “gold standard” because of that reason, the PM unit may provide an inexpensive alternative for the indications recommended by the ASDA.1
References (11)
- et al.
MESAM4: an ambulatory device for the detection of patients at risk for obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS)
Chest
(1992) - et al.
ASDA standards of practice: practice parameters for the use of portable recording in the assessment of obstructive sleep apnea
Sleep
(1994) - et al.
First results of a prospective study validating the method of ambulatory polysomnography using the POLY-MESAM unit
Sleep Breathing
(1997) - et al.
A manual of standardized terminology techniques and scoring system for sleep stages in human subjects
(1968) - et al.
Validierung eines ambulanten Screeninggera¨tes fu¨r schlafbezogene Atmungssto¨rungen: APNOESCREEN I
Somnologie
(1998)
Cited by (57)
Portable evaluation of obstructive sleep apnea in adults: A systematic review
2023, Sleep Medicine ReviewsOptimal Body Mass Index Cut-offs for Identification of Patients with Coronary Artery Disease at High Risk of Obstructive Sleep Apnoea
2016, Heart Lung and CirculationCitation Excerpt :The device has been validated against in-laboratory polysomnography for diagnosis of OSA [19]. Although limited by the lack of objective measurement of sleep duration and the inability to examine sleep-staging, the reported sensitivity and specificity of the Embletta Gold diagnostic device were from 92-97% and 64-96% respectively [20–22]. Output measures recorded were airflow (nasal cannula), oxygen saturation (pulse oximetry), thoraco-abdominal movements (inductive respiratory bands), snoring episodes (integrated pressure transducer), electrocardiography, and body position (continuous actigraphy).
Snoring analysis methods
2011, Medicina ClinicaRestless Legs Syndrome (RLS) in anemic patients with congestive heart failure and chronic renal failure: Lack of effect of anemia treatment
2010, International Journal of CardiologyReliability of home respiratory polygraphy for the diagnosis of sleep apnea-hypopnea syndrome: Analysis of costs
2008, Archivos de Bronconeumologia
The POLY-MESAM unit was loaned to the authors by the MAP Company (16 Fraunhoferstrasse, 82152 Martinsried, Germany). No person at MAP has read the manuscript or has been involved in any of the research, which is the sole responsibility of the authors.