Format

Send to

Choose Destination
J Clin Sleep Med. 2017 Sep 15;13(9):1075-1079. doi: 10.5664/jcsm.6726.

Upper Airway Stimulation for Treatment of Obstructive Sleep Apnea: An Evaluation and Comparison of Outcomes at Two Academic Centers.

Author information

1
Department of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
2
School of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
3
Jefferson Sleep Disorder Center, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
4
Department of Otolaryngology - Head & Neck Surgery, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Abstract

STUDY OBJECTIVES:

Data from patients at Thomas Jefferson University Hospital (TJUH) and University of Pittsburgh Medical Center (UPMC) undergoing upper airway stimulation (UAS) were analyzed. We hypothesize that treatment with UAS will improve both subjective and objective outcome measures and results will be reproducible between institutions.

METHODS:

We reviewed patients undergoing UAS between May 2014 and August 2016. We recorded demographic data, Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), and preoperative and postoperative polysomnographic information. We compared outcome data between institutions and subsequently combined the cohorts and compared baseline to posttreatment results.

RESULTS:

The TJUH cohort consisted of 30 males and 18 females with a mean age of 60.88 years and body mass index of 29.29. The mean preoperative apnea-hypopnea index (AHI), O2 nadir, and ESS were 35.88, 80.96, and 11.09, respectively. The mean postoperative AHI, O2 nadir, and ESS were 6.34, 88.04, and 5.77, respectively. The UPMC cohort consisted of 30 males and 19 females with a mean age of 62.84 years and body mass index of 27.74. The mean preoperative AHI, O2 nadir, and ESS were 35.29, 79.58, and 10.94, respectively. The mean postoperative AHI, O2 nadir, and ESS were 6.28, 84.35, and 6.60, respectively. We found no difference in patients reaching a postoperative AHI less than 15, 10, and 5 when comparing the cohorts. After combining cohorts, we found a significant improvement in postoperative AHI, O2 nadir, and ESS compared to preoperative values.

CONCLUSIONS:

UAS appears to provide a viable alternative to continuous positive airway pressure, producing improvement in both polysomnographic and quality-of-life measures. Results are reproducible at high-volume centers.

KEYWORDS:

sleep apnea; sleep surgery; upper airway stimulation

PMID:
28728614
PMCID:
PMC5566463
DOI:
10.5664/jcsm.6726
[Indexed for MEDLINE]
Free PMC Article

Supplemental Content

Full text links

Icon for American Academy of Sleep Medicine Icon for PubMed Central
Loading ...
Support Center