Sorensen, Channing

Abstract Introduction The SleepImage is an HSAT device (sHSAT) that uses photoplethysmography and oxygen saturation data to generate an apnea hypopnea index (AHI). This sHSAT has been FDA cleared as a software-as-a-medical-device for use in children 2 years and older for diagnosing obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). To our knowledge this sHSAT has not been tested on children concurrent with the gold standard polysomnography (PSG). Methods This study evaluated 50 children 2-6 years of age with tonsillar hypertrophy and OSA symptoms with sHSAT during simultaneous in-lab PSG. Aims were to determine the technical feasibility of using sHSAT in this population and to compare sHSAT results to PSG. The primary endpoint was AHI by sHSAT compared to AHI by PSG and presence of OSA. Sensitivity analysis was performed for presence or absence of OSA diagnosis based on sHSAT versus PSG. Bland-Altman and concordance correlation calculations were used for comparisons. Results 50 patients, median age 4 (IQR 3-5), met criteria; 39 completed PSG and HSAT. The sensitivity with sHSAT for OSA prevalence based on proprietary categorization was 94.1%, specificity 22.7%, LR+ 1.22, and LR- 0.26, with PSG OSA prevalence of 43.6%. There was a 9% sHSAT total failure rate, and the device frequently fell off, resulting in TST difference of -226.9 ±182.8 min between sHSAT and PSG. PSG was trimmed to include only segments where HSAT was confirmed to be on before comparisons. Concordance correlation coefficient between sAHI and AHI-PSG was 0.52. The Bland-Altman analysis comparing sAHI and PSG AHI revealed a mean difference of 0.73 (95% confidence limits: -3.47 to 4.93). Considering only obstructive events, the Bland-Altman the sAHI vs the AHI-PSG shows a mean difference of 1.52 (95%CI -5.40 to 8.44). Conclusion This pilot study demonstrated challenges with feasibility in using the sHSAT in this age group given likelihood of technical difficulties leading to absent or truncated data. When compared with PSG, sHSAT demonstrated a high false-positive rate for diagnosis of OSA, particularly concerning if guiding surgical management. This topic is of considerable importance to the practice of pediatric sleep medicine; further investigation of technological advances in this area is imperative. Support (if any)

Abstract Introduction Insomnia is a common sleep disorder in pediatric patients with neurodevelopmental disabilities. There are no FDA approved medications for insomnia in the pediatric population, and treatment can be challenging. We present a case of successful treatment of sleep maintenance insomnia in a 15-year-old male with doxepin with supportive actigraphy data. Report of case(s) A 15-year-old male with a past history pertinent for a genetic neurodevelopmental disorder, autism spectrum disorder (ASD) and attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) was evaluated in Pediatric Sleep Medicine Clinic for long standing difficulties with sleep maintenance. He experienced frequent, prolonged nocturnal awakenings and early morning awakenings. Previous polysomnogram was negative for sleep disordered breathing. He previously trialed clonidine, guanfacine, trazodone, melatonin, and mirtazapine without significant benefit. Baseline actigraphy demonstrated frequent and prolonged nocturnal awakenings and early morning awakenings. He was initiated on doxepin 3 mg at bedtime, and it was subsequently increased to 6 mg at bedtime. Parental report and repeat actigraphy 4 months later (on doxepin 6 mg) demonstrated improvement in nocturnal awakenings and early morning awakenings. Conclusion Up to now, there are no FDA approved medications for the treatment of insomnia in the pediatric population. A prior study of patients with ASD and ADHD demonstrated the use of doxepin provided clinical improvement in sleep onset and maintenance insomnia based on subjective evidence with parental report. In this case, doxepin improved subjective report of insomnia and correlated with objective findings on actigraphy. Support (if any) NA

Abstract Introduction Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA) in children and adolescents is commonly discussed amongst dental specialists. Physical attributes such as a high and narrow palate, dolichofacial appearance, and retrognathic mandible are reported to increase pediatric risk for OSA. Previous research states rapid maxillary expansion decreases AHI in children with OSA and may be an effective treatment option. Current literature does not report a consistent method of measuring a maxillary transverse deficiency nor does it report a numerical maxillary threshold deficiency that requires expansion in pediatric patients with OSA. Our aims are to compare two different orthodontic diagnostic methods for measuring the maxillary transverse dimension and to assess whether patients diagnosed with mild, moderate, or severe OSA have a numerical threshold for maxillary deficiency. Methods Participants were ages 7-17 years old (average 11.7 years) with no history of orthodontic treatment, craniofacial syndromes, craniosynostosis forms, or nasal abnormalities. Those with and without adenoids and tonsils were included. Participants presented to the Mayo Clinic Sleep Center for their polysomnogram. Their dentition was scanned, and a digital model was rendered. The maxillary transverse dimension was measured via two different methods: McNamara’s Analysis and Andrew’s Six Elements of Orofacial Harmony. Results There were 65 participants: 31 diagnosed with OSA (13 Mild, 4 Moderate, 5 Severe, and 9 Other) and 34 without (controls). Patients in the Other category were diagnosed based on clinical findings. No statistical difference was found between the maxillary transverse measurements of patients with versus without OSA or between the OSA categories. Patients with OSA were more likely to have permanent teeth (61.3% vs 32.4%, p=0.019), tonsils removed (54.8% vs 26.5%, p=0.020), and to have snored during the PSG (83.9% vs 55.9%, p=0.048). Conclusion Conclusions based on this pilot study should be interpreted carefully due to limited sample sizes. No statistically significant differences of the maxillary transverse dimension were found between those with and without OSA using either diagnostic method. No numerical maxillary deficiency threshold was found. Maxillary expansion should not be recommended based on OSA diagnosis alone. Referral to a dental specialist is recommended based on dental needs. Support (if any) Support was provided by Mayo Clinic CTSA grant UL1TR002377.