Automatic slow eye movement (SEM) detection of sleep onset in patients with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS): Comparison between multiple sleep latency test (MSLT) and maintenance of wakefulness test (MWT)

Department of Neurological Sciences, University of Bologna, Via Ugo Foscolo 7, 40132 Bologna, Italy.
Sleep Medicine (Impact Factor: 3.1). 02/2010; 11(3):253-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.sleep.2009.05.020
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT To determine whether automatic slow eye movement (SEM) analysis performs comparably to standard sleep onset criteria at the multiple sleep latency test (MSLT) and at the maintenance of wakefulness test (MWT) in patients with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS).
We compared sleep latencies obtained upon standard analysis of MSLT and MWT recordings with automatically detected SEM latencies in a population of 20 severe OSAS patients that randomly underwent the two tests 1 week apart.
Eight of 20 OSAS patients had EDS as answered by the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS). Mean SEM latency performed comparably to standard sleep onset in both the MSLT (6.4+/-5.5 min versus 7.4+/-5.1 min, p=0.25) and the MWT (25.2+/-14.5 min versus 24.4+/-14.0 min, p=0.45) settings. Mean SEM latency significantly correlated with the sleep latency at the MSLT (r=0.52, p<0.05) and at the MWT (r=0.74, p<0.001). Finally, the Epworth Sleepiness Scale score correlated with SEM latency at the MWT (r=-0.62, p<0.01), but not at the MSLT.
Automatic SEM detection performed comparably to standard polysomnographic assessment of sleep onset, thus providing a simplified technical requirement for the MSLT and the MWT. Further studies are warranted to evaluate SEM detection of sleep onset in other sleep disorders with excessive daytime sleepiness.

Download full-text


Available from: Margherita Fabbri, Feb 26, 2015
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: To assess the distribution across nocturnal sleep of slow eye movements (SEMs). We evaluated SEMs distribution in the different sleep stages, and across sleep cycles in nocturnal recordings of 10 healthy women. Sleep was scored according to standard criteria, and the percentage of time occupied by the SEMs was automatically detected. SEMs were differently represented during sleep stages with the following order: wakefulness after sleep onset (WASO): 61%, NREM sleep stage 1: 54%, REM sleep: 43%, NREM sleep stage 2: 21%, NREM sleep stage 3: 7%, and NREM sleep stage 4: 3% (p<0.0001). There was no difference between phasic and tonic REM sleep. SEMs progressively decreased across the NREM sleep cycles (38%, 15%, 13% during NREM sleep stage 2 in the first three sleep cycles, p=0.006), whereas no significant difference was found for REM, NREM sleep stage 1, slow-wave sleep and WASO. Our findings confirm that SEMs are a phenomenon typical of the sleep onset period, but are also found in REM sleep. The nocturnal evolution of SEMs during NREM sleep stage 2 parallels the homeostatic process underlying slow-wave sleep. SEMs are a marker of sleepiness and, potentially, of sleep homeostasis.
    Clinical neurophysiology: official journal of the International Federation of Clinical Neurophysiology 02/2011; 122(8):1556-61. DOI:10.1016/j.clinph.2010.11.022 · 2.98 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) adversely impacts daily activity and quality of life. Evaluation of EDS should be as easy and effective as possible. Multiple sleep latency test (MSLT) represents the standard in EDS evaluation. It is, however, a long and expensive test. Slow eye movements (SEMs) occurring at the wake-sleep transition could be an easy and reliable marker of sleepiness. We have developed an automatic method for the detection of SEMs. In the present preliminary work we compare standard measurement of EDS with visual and automatic detection of SEMs, both performed on MSLT recordings. We compared sleep latency, obtained upon standard analysis of MSLT with visually and automatically detected SEM latency, in MSLT tests performed in a population of 20 subjects, (10 Obstructive Sleep Apnea Syndrome (OSAS) patients and 10 patients with normal MSLT). There were no significant differences between SEMs latency and standard determined sleep latency both in OSAS and normal MSLT patients. Automatic and visual analysis of SEMs gave comparable results. Both SEMs latency and sleep latency were significantly shorter in OSAS patients than normal MSLT patients. SEMs can be easily detected automatically and represent an effective marker of sleepiness in those conditions usually characterised by sleep onset with NREM sleep. Their performance equals that of standard measurements of sleep onset in MSLT recordings at least for OSAS and normal MSLT patients. Our study is, however, still preliminary and needs confirmation on a larger number of patients and in other clinical conditions characterised by EDS.
    Sleep Medicine 11/2008; 10(6):637-40. DOI:10.1016/j.sleep.2008.07.007 · 3.10 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: The purpose of this study is to assess the Sleep Quality (SQ) in powernapping. The contributed factors for SQ assessment are time of Sleep Onset (SO), Sleep Length (SL), Sleep Depth (SD), and detection of sleep events (K-complex (KC) and Sleep Spindle (SS)). Data from daytime nap for 10 subjects, 2 days each, including EEG and ECG were recorded. The SD and sleep events were analyzed by applying spectral analysis. The SO time was detected by a combination of signal spectral analysis, Slow Rolling Eye Movement (SREM) detection, Heart Rate Variability (HRV) analysis and EEG segmentation using both Autocorrelation Function (ACF), and Crosscorrelation Function (CCF) methods. The EEG derivation FP1-FP2 filtered in a narrow band and used as an alternative to EOG for SREM detection. The ACF and CCF segmentation methods were also applied for detection of sleep events. The ACF method detects segment boundaries based on single channel analysis, while the CCF includes spatial variation from multiple EEG derivation. The results indicate that SREM detection using EEG is possible and can be used as input together with power spectral analysis to enhance SO detection. Both segmentation methods could detect SO as a segment boundary. Additionally they were able to contribute to detection of KC and SS events. The CCF method was more sensitive to spatial EEG changes and the exact segment boundaries varied slightly between the two methods. The HRV analysis revealed, that low and very low frequency variations in the heart rate was highly correlated with the EEG changes during both SO and variations in SD. Analyzing the relationship between the sleep events and SD showed a negative correlation between the Delta and Sigma activity. Analyzing the subjective measurement (SM) showed that there were a positive correlation between the SL and rated SQ. This preliminary study showed that the factors contributing to the overall SQ during powernapping can be assessed markedly better using a fusion of multiple methods. Future studies will include measures of individual performance before and after powernapping and investigate its relation to the assessed SQ.
    Conference proceedings: ... Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society. Conference 08/2011; 2011:769-72. DOI:10.1109/IEMBS.2011.6090176