The aim of this study was to compare home polysomnography (HoPSG) with laboratory polysomnography (LabPSG) in the diagnosis of sleep apnea syndrome (SAS). A total of 103 patients referred for investigation of SAS underwent two full polysomnographies, using the portable Minisomno device at home and the Respisomnographe in the laboratory (both devices manufactured by the same company). Twenty percent of home-studied device polysomnography (HoSD-PSG) recordings and 5% of LabPSG recordings were excluded from analysis either because of lost data or poor quality data. Sleep stage distribution and subjective quality of sleep were similar by both methods. Using LabPSG, the mean (+/- SD) RDI was 25.7 (+/- 30.6) versus 22.8 (+/- 31.5) using HoSD-PSG (p > 0.05). Absolute differences between the home and laboratory respiratory disturbance index (RDI) were less than 10 for 65% of patients. Discordant RDIs (i.e., differences greater than 10) were observed for 63% of individuals with severe SAS (RDI > 30) versus 22% of those with normal or moderate SAS (RDI

Background and objective Average volume‐assured pressure support—automated expiratory positive airway pressure (AVAPS‐AE) combines an automated positive expiratory pressure to maintain upper airway patency to an automated pressure support with a targeted tidal volume. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of 2‐month AVAPS‐AE ventilation versus pressure support (ST) ventilation on objective sleep quality in stable patients with OHS. Secondary outcomes included arterial blood gases, health‐related quality of life, daytime sleepiness, subjective sleep quality and compliance to NIV. Methods This is a prospective multicentric randomized controlled trial. Consecutive OHS patients included had daytime PaCO2 > 6 kPa, BMI ≥ 30 kg/m2, clinical stability for more than 2 weeks and were naive from home NIV. PSG were analysed centrally by two independent experts. Primary endpoint was sleep quality improvement at 2 months. Results Among 69 trial patients, 60 patients had successful NIV setup. Baseline and follow‐up PSG were available for 26 patients randomized in the ST group and 30 in the AVAPS‐AE group. At baseline, PaCO2 was 6.94 ± 0.71 kPa in the ST group and 6.61 ± 0.71 in the AVAPS‐AE group (P = 0.032). No significant between‐group difference was observed for objective sleep quality indices. Improvement in PaCO2 was similar between groups with a mean reduction of −0.87 kPa (95% CI: −1.12 to −0.46) in the ST group versus −0.87 kPa (95% CI: −1.14 to −0.50) in the AVAPS‐AE group (P = 0.984). Mean NIV use was 6.2 h per night in both groups (P = 0.93). NIV setup duration was shorter in the AVAPS‐AE group (P = 0.012). Conclusion AVAPS‐AE and ST ventilation for 2 months had similar impact on sleep quality and gas exchange.