Page 21 of 30

Re: We Do That Now...

Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 9:44 pm
by dsm
StillAnotherGuest wrote:
rested gal wrote:Got a hypothetical question...

IF -- in a sleep lab setting with a full PSG titration going -- a person had an obstructive apnea involving tongue, soft palate, and back of throat all collapsing on each other, but there was still a thread of air being breathed in and out, and IF the sleep tech did immediately raise the pressure a cm or two, would that additional pressure be more likely to:

1. open the airway a bit more?

2. close the airway more firmly?

3. do something else?

4. do nothing?
Depending on the amount of pressure and speed of response, I would say somewhere between "open the airway a bit more" to "completely resolve the event", since that's basically the philosophy of BiPAP titration.

SAG
SAG,

I can see the point being made, but surely Ipap is only as effective for 'cleaning up' events, as Epap is effective in keeping the airway open.

If Epap is not holding the airway even partially open, then Ipap will have a very questionable effect. I am sure we are all in agreement that a partially open airway has to benefit from a pressure increase & the reasons are self evident.

Dual pressure is though a workable mechanism for nudging someone with Irregular breathing and CAs back into regular breathing.

Bilevels are also an excellent device for people with lung or other medical problems where breathing out against a fixed pressure CPAP causes them stress and other problems.

Now that Bilevels are affordable, I certainly believe they are the top form of exhalation relief and go a big mile toward reducing aerophagia and mask leaks.

I don't believe RGs question has a good answer yet.

DSM


Re: We Do That Now...

Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2008 11:54 pm
by rested gal
dsm wrote:
StillAnotherGuest wrote:
rested gal wrote:Got a hypothetical question...

IF -- in a sleep lab setting with a full PSG titration going -- a person had an obstructive apnea involving tongue, soft palate, and back of throat all collapsing on each other, but there was still a thread of air being breathed in and out, and IF the sleep tech did immediately raise the pressure a cm or two, would that additional pressure be more likely to:

1. open the airway a bit more?

2. close the airway more firmly?

3. do something else?

4. do nothing?
Depending on the amount of pressure and speed of response, I would say somewhere between "open the airway a bit more" to "completely resolve the event", since that's basically the philosophy of BiPAP titration.

SAG
I don't believe RGs question has a good answer yet.

DSM
Really? I thought that particular hypothetical scenario question was answered quite well. Answered by SAG in your quote, and by NHE and -SWS:

_______________________

Writing about the research study he kindly provided a link to, NightHawkeye said:
According to these researchers the answer to your first question is that without additional pressure, the partially occluded airway collapses in on itself when the opening is narrowed
NightHawkeye wrote:
rested gal wrote:So, if I understand you, the answer you're giving, NHE, is that more pressure applied by a hypothetical tech-with-a-triggerhappy-finger-on-the-button would likely open the obstructive apnea to at least some extent?
Correct.
_______________________

-SWS wrote:If the airway was still open a 1 or 2 cm pressure increase would not push the tongue back in my opinion.
I understand "back" in this context to mean -- would not push the tongue back farther into the throat. In other words, that more cpap pressure would not be likely to cause a tongue that was blocking the airway enough to be classified an "official" (by sleep lab standards) obstructive apnea (a little airflow still, but not nearly enough airflow) to block the airway more.
-SWS wrote:It's after occlusion occurs when those severe survival-based diaphragmatic pressures start to kick in. That's the point at which the base of the tongue can conceivably get pulled back rather tightly IMO.

On the flip side of that same coin of consideration, the 1 or 2 cm pressure increase would have to be very quick to even stand a snowball's chance of staving off a rapidly escalating airway collapse. It would have to occur toward the beginning of that sequence
I agree...which is why I posed the hypopthetical questions about what might happen if a PSG-watching sleep tech raised the pressure right then...when the tech first saw an almost completely closed obstructive apnea happening (still some airflow occurring), and also when seeing a fully closed one (no airflow.)

________________________

I agree with all those answers and thought they were good answers.

Remember, the question (purely hypothetical) you quoted has nothing to do with what a treatment machine would do. Nor with whether a sleep tech would want to zap a single obstructive apnea with more pressure during a normal titration.

Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 12:22 am
by dsm
RG,

But they don't differentiate nor make clear the difference in effect on a full occlusion vs a partial occlusion & once again I see where we appear to be using one answer for different situations. But I fear that pursuing the point is only going to go in circles.

If you are happy with the answers that is good - I can't say I have seen an adequate answer to the question of if applying rapid pressure to a full occlusion is good or bad. I just need a bit more convincing.

Horses for courses I think

DSM

Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 2:01 am
by rested gal
dsm wrote:once again I see where we appear to be using one answer for different situations.
Well, all I can say is reread your own quote of the specific scenario SAG mentioned... looked to me like he was answering my first question dealing with an obstructive apnea that still has "a thread of air being breathed in and out."

NHE and I were also agreeing on what the researchers he cited were probably saying about that same one specific scenario.

-SWS addressed the same specific scenario NHE and SAG did, AND furthermore gave his opinion on what he thought might happen in the second instance I had asked about... when it's a full occlusion with no thread of air.

As I said, I thought they were all good answers...to the specific question (SAG and NHE) or questions (-SWS) each of them chose to deal with.

Well, If I Have To Pick One...

Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 7:27 am
by StillAnotherGuest
rested gal wrote:Then...same 4 questions if the obstructive apnea were a full occlusion -- no air, not even a thread, being breathed.
For that one, with only 1-2 cmH2O, I'm going to go with "nothing".

Out of all the factors involved, the one that would have the most effect would be increase in lung volume, which wouldn't occur until the ensuing period of spontaneous breathing.

SAG

Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 8:22 am
by -SWS
Bill, your suggested statement-refinement works fine for me. Thanks.

Snoredog, that news about your youngest daughter is very cool news, indeed. Congratulations!!! On the slim chance your daughters get around to asking what your friends on the message board think regarding name choice, how about something along the lines of: "Snoredog Daughters Family Dental Practice"? I can see it in the Yellow Pages now!

Congratulations again!!!!!


Re: How About...

Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 9:40 am
by -SWS
Ozij's red text above most likely means that dual-rate pressure strategy never got dropped from the 420e.


StillAnotherGuest wrote:
-SWS wrote:
ozij wrote:20050016536 is a patent application from Jan. 2005.
Meaning the design contained in any 2005 application is submitted too late to represent what's inside any machine having received a May 2003 FDA approval.
Hmmm, good point. How about 6299581?


There's a rumor circulating that Rapoport sold patent 6299581 to Volvo for use in the S80. Sir, do you have any clue just how that rumor got started? .


Re: Well, If I Have To Pick One...

Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 10:12 am
by Wulfman
StillAnotherGuest wrote:
rested gal wrote:Then...same 4 questions if the obstructive apnea were a full occlusion -- no air, not even a thread, being breathed.
For that one, with only 1-2 cmH2O, I'm going to go with "nothing".

Out of all the factors involved, the one that would have the most effect would be increase in lung volume, which wouldn't occur until the ensuing period of spontaneous breathing.

SAG
Thank you.

Den (been wondering if this patient was "alive" or not.)

Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 11:18 am
by Snoredog
[quote="-SWS"]Bill, your suggested statement-refinement works fine for me. Thanks.

Snoredog, that news about your youngest daughter is very cool news, indeed. Congratulations!!! On the slim chance your daughters get around to asking what your friends on the message board think regarding name choice, how about something along the lines of: "Snoredog Daughters Family Dental Practice"? I can see it in the Yellow Pages now!

Congratulations again!!!!!


Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 11:29 am
by -SWS
Is the oldest daughter still pursuing post-doctoral study or did she go into dental practice yet?

Very cool if your two daughters eventually shared a dental practice. I bet you're really proud. .

Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 11:47 am
by Snoredog
-SWS wrote:Is the oldest daughter still pursuing post-doctoral study or did she go into dental practice yet?

Very cool if your two daughters eventually shared a dental practice. I bet you're really proud. .
She starts her residency at the VA Hospital in Long Beach in July, it is going to be a killer commute (40-45 miles one way) but she said she wants to stay in her condo in Sherman Oaks and rough it out as it is only a year, so she is looking at getting a Hybrid so she can drive it in the HOV lane.

After her residency at VA she will decide where she wants to open a practice, hopefully that will be back closer to home in SF bay area.

Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 11:52 am
by ozij
so she is looking at getting a Hybrid so she can drive it in the HOV lane.
Wouldn't a Swift be faster?

O.


Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 2:04 pm
by Velbor
As an invited, but not necessarily welcomed, guest at this cocktail party (per page 18 ), I will now exercise my boorish freedom to barge into your conversation, asking naive questions and making uneducated comments. You have been talking about OSA and CPAP models, and that has caused me to think (a rare and dangerous condition) and question the models in my own head.

The principal model in my head is that of the long limp balloon and the "pneumatic splint." Can't suck through a limp balloon (OSA?). But you can blow through it (CPAP?), and thereby it is "held open" (pneumatic splint?). I have a problem with this model, and I might even hope that responding to me ("If you can't explain it so a child will understand ....") might be helpful for others as well.

The balloon model works because the pressure of blowing is effectively directed radially outward. The internal pressure differential is operative against the external atmosphere "pushing" radially inward on the balloon. But is this applicable to our upper airway structures? Does the neck "expand" as we breathe (as the chest wall does) or in response to CPAP? If the neck is more like a rigid tube (as it seems to me) than like a limp balloon, what is "radial" pressure "pushing" against? (I know that the words do not do justice to the physics.) Against "soft tissue"? But where is the pressure differential? Gobs of grease inside a rigid tube are not "flattened" by increasing pressure in the tube. Is CPAP "squeezing" blood and fluids out of the tissues by its radial pressure? Possible, but I've never heard THAT as the proposed mechanism of CPAP efficacy.

Or put another way: does the upper airway "collapse" due to some "radial" pressure which is opposed by CPAP? The "collapse" of OSA is usually attributed to muscle relaxation and gravity. Tell me where there is a radial pressure differential, and perhaps I will be able to understand how CPAP can "push" soft tissues or a tongue muscle "out of the way". There is a difference, I think, between a rigid tube (from the perspective of radial pressure) with "movable" and possibly occlusive movable "goop" or "growths" along the inside wall, and a balloon.

Or put yet another way: does the negative pressure within the chest on attempted inspiration (with respect to the outside air) CAUSE a "radial" collapse of the upper airways? If so, where is the "outside" pressure acting radially on which "flexible" parts of the neck?

Being of limited imagination, I am having trouble visualizing OSA as a pressure-caused radial collapse of the upper airways, and therefore I am having trouble visualizing CPAP working as a radially-oriented "splint". If the airway "collapse" of OSA is due to the physical movement of "attachments" inside an otherwise relatively rigid tube (from the perspective of external pressure), i find it hard to see how CPAP, viewed as operative radially, can "expand" anything, whether immediately or preemptively.

So .... if not radially (assuming that anything I have expressed above makes any sense at all), does CPAP work by exerting its pressure "axially," along the length of the upper airway? Here, at least, I can find pressure differentials, with respect to the flexible-walled chest and the lungs. Does CPAP work, then, by its pressure differential (with respect to the negative pressure within the thorax on inspiration) "pushing axially downward" (i.e., toward the lungs)? Would loose floppy tissue, or tongue protuberances, be "bent" (rather than "lifted") out of the way, because their bases are "fixed" to the "rigid" upper airway wall? (The vectors of such movement would have a radial component! But not due to a radial "pressure" differential!) And once air is moving, would the dynamics of the "wind" play a role?

And here I stop, because my imagination and my knowledge of physiology and physics, perhaps already long exhausted and inadequate, comes to an end. Corks? Eggs? Pneumatic splints? Someone, please, take over.


Finally, to offer hopefully some socially-redeeming value to my presence at this cocktail party, I offer the following link which seems to me to be fairly current (2008), reasonably good, and hopefully new to you:

http://medind.nic.in/iae/t08/i1/iaet08i1p137.pdf

Overview and Implications of Obstructive Sleep Apnoea

Hanish Sharma and S.K. Sharma

Obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) is a leading public health problem both in the developed and developing nations. However, awareness regarding diagnostic options, management and consequences of untreated OSA remains inadequate. In developing nations, the resources for adequate sleep medicine facilities are scarce. Therefore, there is a need for low cost, simple and accurate diagnostic and therapeutic modalities exists. Untreated OSA leads to excessive daytime sleepiness, diminished performance and an overall poor quality of life. The role of OSA in promoting insulin resistance, atherosclerosis, hypertension and a procoagulant state has now been established. Newer insights into the biochemical and genetic mediators of OSA have raised hopes regarding the development of a “cure”. However, as of now, continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy remains the first-line treatment. Though its use improves the quality of life as well as metabolic derangements observed in OSA, patients’ acceptance remains low. Its high cost and long-term use are also cumbersome. Newer modes of delivering CPAP, oral appliances and upper airway surgery are the other options available. It is hoped that their appropriate use to increase patients’ compliance may improve the quality of life as well as provide a survival benefit.

[Indian J Chest Dis Allied Sci 2008; 50: 137-150]


Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 3:22 pm
by NightHawkeye
Welcome, Velbor!!!

Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2008 3:37 pm
by Snoredog
[quote="Velbor"]As an invited, but not necessarily welcomed, guest at this cocktail party (per page 18 ), I will now exercise my boorish freedom to barge into your conversation, asking naive questions and making uneducated comments. You have been talking about OSA and CPAP models, and that has caused me to think (a rare and dangerous condition) and question the models in my own head.

The principal model in my head is that of the long limp balloon and the "pneumatic splint." Can't suck through a limp balloon (OSA?). But you can blow through it (CPAP?), and thereby it is "held open" (pneumatic splint?). I have a problem with this model, and I might even hope that responding to me ("If you can't explain it so a child will understand ....") might be helpful for others as well.

The balloon model works because the pressure of blowing is effectively directed radially outward. The internal pressure differential is operative against the external atmosphere "pushing" radially inward on the balloon. But is this applicable to our upper airway structures? Does the neck "expand" as we breathe (as the chest wall does) or in response to CPAP? If the neck is more like a rigid tube (as it seems to me) than like a limp balloon, what is "radial" pressure "pushing" against? (I know that the words do not do justice to the physics.) Against "soft tissue"? But where is the pressure differential? Gobs of grease inside a rigid tube are not "flattened" by increasing pressure in the tube. Is CPAP "squeezing" blood and fluids out of the tissues by its radial pressure? Possible, but I've never heard THAT as the proposed mechanism of CPAP efficacy.

Or put another way: does the upper airway "collapse" due to some "radial" pressure which is opposed by CPAP? The "collapse" of OSA is usually attributed to muscle relaxation and gravity. Tell me where there is a radial pressure differential, and perhaps I will be able to understand how CPAP can "push" soft tissues or a tongue muscle "out of the way". There is a difference, I think, between a rigid tube (from the perspective of radial pressure) with "movable" and possibly occlusive movable "goop" or "growths" along the inside wall, and a balloon.

Or put yet another way: does the negative pressure within the chest on attempted inspiration (with respect to the outside air) CAUSE a "radial" collapse of the upper airways? If so, where is the "outside" pressure acting radially on which "flexible" parts of the neck?

Being of limited imagination, I am having trouble visualizing OSA as a pressure-caused radial collapse of the upper airways, and therefore I am having trouble visualizing CPAP working as a radially-oriented "splint". If the airway "collapse" of OSA is due to the physical movement of "attachments" inside an otherwise relatively rigid tube (from the perspective of external pressure), i find it hard to see how CPAP, viewed as operative radially, can "expand" anything, whether immediately or preemptively.

So .... if not radially (assuming that anything I have expressed above makes any sense at all), does CPAP work by exerting its pressure "axially," along the length of the upper airway? Here, at least, I can find pressure differentials, with respect to the flexible-walled chest and the lungs. Does CPAP work, then, by its pressure differential (with respect to the negative pressure within the thorax on inspiration) "pushing axially downward" (i.e., toward the lungs)? Would loose floppy tissue, or tongue protuberances, be "bent" (rather than "lifted") out of the way, because their bases are "fixed" to the "rigid" upper airway wall? (The vectors of such movement would have a radial component! But not due to a radial "pressure" differential!) And once air is moving, would the dynamics of the "wind" play a role?

And here I stop, because my imagination and my knowledge of physiology and physics, perhaps already long exhausted and inadequate, comes to an end. Corks? Eggs? Pneumatic splints? Someone, please, take over.


Finally, to offer hopefully some socially-redeeming value to my presence at this cocktail party, I offer the following link which seems to me to be fairly current (2008), reasonably good, and hopefully new to you:

http://medind.nic.in/iae/t08/i1/iaet08i1p137.pdf

Overview and Implications of Obstructive Sleep Apnoea

Hanish Sharma and S.K. Sharma

Obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) is a leading public health problem both in the developed and developing nations. However, awareness regarding diagnostic options, management and consequences of untreated OSA remains inadequate. In developing nations, the resources for adequate sleep medicine facilities are scarce. Therefore, there is a need for low cost, simple and accurate diagnostic and therapeutic modalities exists. Untreated OSA leads to excessive daytime sleepiness, diminished performance and an overall poor quality of life. The role of OSA in promoting insulin resistance, atherosclerosis, hypertension and a procoagulant state has now been established. Newer insights into the biochemical and genetic mediators of OSA have raised hopes regarding the development of a “cure”. However, as of now, continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy remains the first-line treatment. Though its use improves the quality of life as well as metabolic derangements observed in OSA, patients’ acceptance remains low. Its high cost and long-term use are also cumbersome. Newer modes of delivering CPAP, oral appliances and upper airway surgery are the other options available. It is hoped that their appropriate use to increase patients’ compliance may improve the quality of life as well as provide a survival benefit.

[Indian J Chest Dis Allied Sci 2008; 50: 137-150]