Upper-Airway Stimulation Before, After, or Without Uvulopalatopharyngoplasty: A Two-Year Perspective.
Cohort Studies
Electric Stimulation Therapy
/ instrumentation
Electrodes, Implanted
Endoscopy
/ methods
Female
Humans
Male
Middle Aged
Oxygen Consumption
Palate
/ physiopathology
Pharynx
/ physiopathology
Postoperative Period
Plastic Surgery Procedures
/ methods
Severity of Illness Index
Sleep Apnea, Obstructive
/ physiopathology
Tonsillectomy
/ statistics & numerical data
Treatment Outcome
Uvula
/ physiopathology
Hypoglossal nerve stimulation
PAP failure
PAP intolerance
UPPP
sleep apnea
upper airway stimulation
Journal
The Laryngoscope
ISSN: 1531-4995
Titre abrégé: Laryngoscope
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 8607378
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
02 2019
02 2019
Historique:
received:
27
03
2018
revised:
25
04
2018
accepted:
21
05
2018
pubmed:
25
9
2018
medline:
24
5
2019
entrez:
25
9
2018
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Upper airway stimulation (UAS) is an effective second-line treatment for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). In certain patients, there is a considerable need for advanced programming, notably with inadequate palatal response to therapy. The aim of the study was to investigate the impact of uvulopalatopharyngoplasty and tonsillectomy (UPPP-TE) on UAS therapy outcomes from a 2-year perspective after implantation. This study included all consecutive patients implanted with UAS in which a full set of 1- and 2-year follow-up assessments (M12 and M24) were obtained. Cases were analyzed in three groups: patients with UPPP-TE after (group 1) and before (group 2) UAS, and those without UPPP-TE (group 3). Therapy success could be achieved in about 80% of the entire cohort. Groups 2 and 3 did not differ significantly with regard to obesity, Apnea-Hypopnea Index, or Oxygen Desaturation Index. With regard to initial sleep endoscopy, there were fewer patients without any obstruction at the palatal and oropharyngeal levels and higher prevalence of lateral obstruction patterns at oropharynx in group 1 in contrast to groups 2 and 3. Groups 2 and 3 showed similar results, although group 2 patients underwent UPPP-TE before UAS implantation. UPPP-TE should be considered in patients with persistent OSA after UAS implantation if the obstruction is identified at the level of velum and oropharynx. Although this approach has higher response rates and better outcomes can be achieved in patients with UAS, there is no indication for patients to routinely undergo UPPP-TE prior to UAS implantation. 4 Laryngoscope, 129:514-518, 2019.
Types de publication
Journal Article
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
514-518Informations de copyright
© 2018 The American Laryngological, Rhinological and Otological Society, Inc.