Skip to content

Continuous Positive Pressure Versus Bi-level in Overlap Syndrome

Optimal Positive Airway Pressure in Overlap Syndrome: a Randomized Controlled Trial

Status
UNKNOWN
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT03766542
Enrollment
70
Registered
2018-12-06
Start date
2019-01-01
Completion date
2020-09-01
Last updated
2018-12-06

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Nocturnal Hypoventilation, Overlap Syndrome

Brief summary

Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) became the established treatment for overlap syndrome (OS). It has been showed that the survival benefits of CPAP favored hypercapnic patients. When considering hypercapnic stable COPD patients, survival benefits occurred when the use of bi- level ventilation therapy was targeted to significantly reduce hypercapnia. This highlights the relevance of hypercapnia and hypoventilation correction. Thus, the purpose of this study is to compare the use of CPAP to Bi-level ventilation in hypercapnic OS patients, since the later may correct not only the airway patency but also increase the magnitude of each breath.

Detailed description

Obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) represent two of the most prevalent respiratory disorders in clinical practice and their coexistence is often described has overlap syndrome (OS) In patients with COPD, the coexistence of OSA is associated with an increased risk of death from any cause, and hospitalization because of COPD exacerbation. Treatment with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) has been showed to be effective and associated with improved survival and decreased hospitalizations. When CPAP became established treatment for overlap syndrome, a multivariate analysis revealed that the hours of CPAP use were an independent predictor of mortality. Furthermore, it has been showed that the survival benefit of CPAP favors hypercapnic patients with overlap syndrome. Regarding hypercapnic stable COPD patients, the best results with long-term non-invasive positive pressure ventilation have been noted in studies using more intensive strategies of ventilation, with higher inspiratory pressures and higher backup rates that improved or even normalized daytime hypercapnia. In fact, survival benefits occurred when ventilation was targeted to significantly reduce hypercapnia. As for typical COPD, overlap syndrome patients might also benefit from optimal daytime hypercapnia correction, which could be better achieved using bi-level ventilation instead of CPAP, since it could not only maintain airway patency but also improve alveolar ventilation. This study aims to compare CPAP therapy to bi-level ventilatory support in overlap syndrome patients, not only for the efficacy to achieve hypercapnia reduction, but also regarding acute disease exacerbations, symptoms and treatment compliance. Therefore, the authors designed a randomized controlled trial with recruitment and power calculations based on the applicant's own data. After the diagnosis, patients will be randomized either for CPAP or BPAP treatment. If CPAP is to be initiated, optimal pressure to maintain upper airway patency will be determined. If there are continued obstructive respiratory events at 15 cm H2O of CPAP, patients will cross-over to the BPAP study arm. Regarding BPAP titration, patients will be treated with ventilators set in pressure support spontaneous/timed mode, both inspiratory and expiratory positive airway pressures (IPAP and EPAP) will be manually titrated. EPAP will ensure optimal pressure for maintaining upper airway patency and IPAP will be defined according to patient tolerance and pressure support necessary to achieve normal PaCO2 values or to reduce baseline PaCO2 by 20% or more; Follow-up will be performed at 1, 6 and 12 months. Follow-up will include clinical evaluation with physical examination and questionnaires (COPD Assessment test, Epworth Sleepiness Scale and MRC dyspnea score), blood gas analysis, treatment adherence, AHI, nocturnal pulse oximetry and exacerbations. 12-month follow-up will also include lung function test, 6-min walking test and nocturnal capnography.

Interventions

DEVICEBi-level positive airway pressure with ventilatory support

Positive airway pressure will be applied in the experimental group through a oronasal interface, in ventilatory support mode (Bi-level) with a fixed backup rate.

DEVICEcontinuous positive airway pressure without ventilatory support

Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) will be applied in the active comparator group through a oronasal interface.

Sponsors

Marta Drummond MD PhD
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
Joao Carlos Winck MD PhD
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
Mafalda van Zeller MD Phstud
CollaboratorUNKNOWN
Hospital Sao Joao
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Intervention model description

Prospective randomized controlled trial.

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
40 Years to No maximum
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* COPD (FEV1/FVC \< 70 (post-BD) and history of smoking - 10 PPY) * FEV1\< 80% and COPD symptoms * AHI ≥ 15 events/hour

Exclusion criteria

* Persistent hypercapnic respiratory failure with acidosis (defined as pH \<7.30 after bronchodilators) * Hypoxia requiring long term oxygen therapy * BMI \> 35 kg/m2 * Previously-initiated long term non-invasive positive pressure ventilation * Other lung disease resulting in respiratory symptoms * Age \<40 years * Pregnancy * Malignant comorbidities * Patients undergoing renal replacement therapy * Restrictive lung disease causing hypercapnia * Severe heart failure, unstable angina and severe arrhythmias * Inability to comply with the protocol

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
diurnal hypercapnia (pCO2 <= 45 mmH2O )1 year(PaCO2 \<= 45 mmH2O )
nocturnal oxygen desaturation correction1 yearMean nocturnal SpO2 \>=90%, with \<10% of the total recording time \<90% after correction of leaks)

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Changes in FVC1 yearForced vital capacity (FVC) (% of predicted) from pre-intervention to follow up
Changes in RV1 yearResidual volume (RV) (% of predicted) from pre-intervention to follow up
Sleepiness evaluation1 yearEpworth sleepiness scale is a self-administered questionnaire with 8 questions. Respondents are asked to rate, on a 4-point scale (0-3), their usual chances of dozing off or falling asleep while engaged in eight different activities. The ESS score (the sum of 8 item scores, 0-3) can range from 0 to 24. The higher the ESS score, the higher that person's average sleep propensity in daily life (ASP), or their 'daytime sleepiness'. Comparation of patient score from pre-intervention to follow up
acute respiratory exacerbations1 yearFrequency of acute exacerbations of COPD requiring addition of antibiotics and or steroids and or hospital admission
Compliance to PAP1 yearmedian hours of compliance per night
exercise tolerance1 yearChange in the 6 minute walking test from pre-intervention to follow up
Dyspnoea evaluation1 yearThe mMRC Dyspnea Scale quantifies disability attributable to breathlessness and is useful for baseline dyspnea characterization in patients with respiratory diseases. The score can range from 0 to 4. The higher the mMRC score the higher the dyspnea. Comparation of patient score from pre-intervention to follow up
Symptoms of COPD1 yearCOPD Assessment test
Apneia/Hiponeia Index1 yearNumber of Residual AHI/per hour
nocturnal hypoventilation1 year∆PtcCO2\<10mmHg during night from pre-intervention to follow up
PAP usage1 yearpercentage of days of use per month
Changes in FEV11 yearForced Expiratory Volume (FEV1) in first second (% of predicted) from pre-intervention to follow up

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026