Evidence Hub

Association of Apnea vs Hypopnea Predominance With Pediatric Sleep Apnea Outcomes: A Secondary Analysis of the Childhood Adenotonsillectomy Trial

Saadhana Kukkala, T. Vazifedan, C. Baldassari

JAMA Otolaryngology - Head and Neck Surgery, 2022

386 participants · 4 citations

Abstract

Importance

Children with apnea-predominant obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) are hypothesized to have a more severe form of the disease. However, research is lacking as to whether there is a significant difference in outcomes between children with apnea-predominant vs hypopnea-predominant OSA.

Objective

To assess the association between baseline apnea-predominant or hypopnea-predominant OSA on polysomnography and quality of life (QOL) outcomes in children with obstructive sleep apnea managed by watchful waiting with supportive care (WWSC) or adenotonsillectomy (AT).

Design, Setting, and Participants

This case-control study is a secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial, the Childhood Adenotonsillectomy Trial, which was conducted at multiple tertiary children's hospitals from October 2007 to June 2012. Children aged 5.0 to 9.9 years with OSA were randomized to WWSC or AT and underwent polysomnography and completed validated QOL and symptom assessments at baseline and 7 months. The current data analysis was performed from October 2020 to February 2022.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Apnea-predominant OSA was defined as an apnea hypopnea index (AHI) greater than 2 with more than 50% of the obstructive events being apneas. Patients were considered to have hypopnea-predominant OSA if they had an AHI greater than 2 and more than 50% of the obstructive events were hypopneas.

Results

A total of 386 children (185 boys [48%]; mean [SD] age, 6.56 [1.4] years) were analyzed. The mean…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 386 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free