Search

Background: Conflicting data exist regarding the effects of obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) on cardiorespiratory fitness in morbidly obese individuals with normal resting left ventricular function. Methods: Ninety-two morbidly obese subjects without any prior diagnosis of OSAS underwent cardiorespiratory fitness testing, two-dimensional echocardiography, and overnight polysomnography. Using the results of the polysomnogram, comparisons were made between subjects with (n 42) and without (n 50) OSAS. Results: Mean body mass index (BMI) for the study population (n 92) was 48.6 9.3 kg/m 2 ( SD); mean age was 45.5 9.8 years, and approximately 69% were female. Despite having a higher resting, exercise, and resting mean arterial pressures, the OSAS cohort had a maximum oxygen consumption that was lower than the cohort without OSAS (21.1 mL/kg/min vs 17.6 mL/kg/min; p < 0.001). There was no difference in BMI, age, gender, waist circumference, and neck circumference between those with and without OSAS. Differences were observed between the cohorts in systolic BP, diastolic BP, and heart rate during rest, exercise, and recovery periods. There was no difference in ejection fraction, diastolic dysfunction, and treadmill test duration between cohorts. Conclusions: Morbidly obese individuals with OSAS demonstrate reduced cardiorespiratory fitness and differing hemodynamic responses to exercise testing as compared with their counterparts without this disorder. These data suggest chronic sympathetic nervous system activation negatively influences aerobic capacity in OSAS. (CHEST 2008; 134:539–545) Abbreviations: AHI apnea-hypopnea index; BMI body mass index; bpm beats per minute; CPX cardiopulmonary exercise stress testing; DBP diastolic BP; LVEF left ventricular ejection fraction; OSAS obstructive sleep apnea

A total of 47 patients with sleep disorder (36 male and 11 female) with a mean age of 47.5 ± 15 years were evaluated for daytime symptoms with a Multiple Sleep Latency Test (MSLT) and a Maintenance of Wakefulness Test (MWT) given on the same day—once at the time of their diagnostic evaluation and again after one to six months of treatment. The MSLT and MWT data are consistent with the notion that sleep tendency, as measured by the MSLT and ability to remain awake, as measured by the MWT, represent different physiologic processes. Data show a marked treatment-related improvement in ability to stay awake as measured by the MWT and no treatment-related improvement in sleepiness as measured by the MSLT. We conclude that there is a heterogeneous subpopulation of patients with sleep disorders whose symptoms of daytime sleepiness will show no treatment-related improvement in daytime symptoms if they are evaluated only by the MSLT. We suggest that, since ability to stay awake (and not ability to fall asleep) is a requisite for all job-related duties, an objective, physiologically based test such as the MWT should be used to assess the impact of sleep disorders in cases where there is a clinical concern about fitness to drive or work.

The multiple sleep latency test and the maintenance of wakefulness test were administered on the same day to 258 consecutive patients whose clinical presentation required evaluation for excessive sleepiness. While the MSLT is the standard test for assessing excessive daytime sleepiness, the MWT may have some clinical advantage over the MSLT when the assessment of daytime alertness is the primary goal. To explore further the relationship between alertness and sleepiness, we have conducted a thorough analysis of the similarities, differences, and correlations between MWT and MSLT. The results of this study show that the coefficient of correlation between MSLT and MWT (r = 0.41), although statistically significant, accounts for less than 17 percent of the variability between the two tests. Factor analysis suggests that two factors, alertness and sleepiness, account for 91 percent of all variance. Our data demonstrate that patients with diagnosable disorders of excessive somnolence may be discordant on the two tests (eg, having low sleep latency on MSLT but high sleep latency on MWT). Specifically, we found that some patients with abnormally low MSLT scores were able to stay awake when asked to do so on the MWT, and conversely, some patients who failed to stay awake when asked to do so on the MWT were unable to fall asleep quickly on the MSLT. We conclude that the MWT and MSLT measure different abilities and that the MWT may be a useful adjuvant daytime test in many clinical situations.

A total of 47 patients with sleep disorder (36 male and 11 female) with a mean age of 47.5 +/- 15 years were evaluated for daytime symptoms with a Multiple Sleep Latency Test (MSLT) and a Maintenance of Wakefulness Test (MWT) given on the same day--once at the time of their diagnostic evaluation and again after one to six months of treatment. The MSLT and MWT data are consistent with the notion that sleep tendency, as measured by the MSLT and ability to remain awake, as measured by the MWT, represent different physiologic processes. Data show a marked treatment-related improvement in ability to stay awake as measured by the MWT and no treatment-related improvement in sleepiness as measured by the MSLT. We conclude that there is a heterogeneous subpopulation of patients with sleep disorders whose symptoms of daytime sleepiness will show no treatment-related improvement in daytime symptoms if they are evaluated only by the MSLT. We suggest that, since ability to stay awake (and not ability to fall asleep) is a requisite for all job-related duties, an objective, physiologically based test such as the MWT should be used to assess the impact of sleep disorders in cases where there is a clinical concern about fitness to drive or work.