Transoral robotic surgery vs. endoscopic partial midline glossectomy for obstructive sleep apnea

Objective: To compare sleep-related outcomes in obstructive sleep apnea hypopnea syndrome (OSAHS) patients following base of tongue resection via robotic surgery and endoscopic midline glossectomy. Methods: This was a retrospective study. A total of 114 robotic and 37 endoscopic midline glossectomy...

Descripción completa

Guardado en:
Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: David Folk, Mark D'Agostino
Formato: article
Lenguaje:EN
Publicado: KeAi Communications Co., Ltd. 2017
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://doaj.org/article/01ebf4e867b14a6c8c8caa82e8819dd6
Etiquetas: Agregar Etiqueta
Sin Etiquetas, Sea el primero en etiquetar este registro!
id oai:doaj.org-article:01ebf4e867b14a6c8c8caa82e8819dd6
record_format dspace
spelling oai:doaj.org-article:01ebf4e867b14a6c8c8caa82e8819dd62021-12-02T11:50:11ZTransoral robotic surgery vs. endoscopic partial midline glossectomy for obstructive sleep apnea2095-881110.1016/j.wjorl.2017.05.004https://doaj.org/article/01ebf4e867b14a6c8c8caa82e8819dd62017-06-01T00:00:00Zhttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2095881117300537https://doaj.org/toc/2095-8811Objective: To compare sleep-related outcomes in obstructive sleep apnea hypopnea syndrome (OSAHS) patients following base of tongue resection via robotic surgery and endoscopic midline glossectomy. Methods: This was a retrospective study. A total of 114 robotic and 37 endoscopic midline glossectomy surgeries were performed between July 2010 and April 2015 as part of single or multilevel surgery. Patients were excluded for indications other than sleep apnea or if complete sleep studies were not obtained. Thus, 45 robotic and 16 endoscopic surgeries were included in the analysis. Results: In the robotic surgery group there were statistically significant improvements in AHI [(44.4 ± 22.6) events/hâ(14.0 ± 3.0) events/h, P < 0.001] Epworth Sleepiness Scale (12.3 ± 4.6 to 4.5 ± 2.9, P < 0.001), and O2 nadir (82.0% ± 6.1% to 85.0% ± 5.4%, P < 0.001). In the endoscopic group there were also improvements in AHI (48.7 ± 30.2 to 27.4 ± 31.9, P = 0.06), Epworth Sleepiness Scale (12.6 ± 5.5 to 8.3 ± 4.5, P = 0.08), and O2 nadir (80.2% ± 8.6% to 82.7% ± 6.5%, P = 0.4). Surgical success rate was 75.6% and 56.3% in the robotic and endoscopic groups, respectively. Greater volume of tissue removed was predictive of surgical success in the robotic cases (10.3 vs. 8.6 ml, P = 0.02). Conclusions: Both robotic surgery and endoscopic techniques for tongue base reduction improve objective measures of sleep apnea. Greater success rates may be achieved with robotic surgery compared to traditional methods. Keywords: Sleep surgery, Transoral robotic surgery, TORS, Midline glossectomy, Partial glossectomy, Posterior glossectomyDavid FolkMark D'AgostinoKeAi Communications Co., Ltd.articleOtorhinolaryngologyRF1-547SurgeryRD1-811ENWorld Journal of Otorhinolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery, Vol 3, Iss 2, Pp 101-105 (2017)
institution DOAJ
collection DOAJ
language EN
topic Otorhinolaryngology
RF1-547
Surgery
RD1-811
spellingShingle Otorhinolaryngology
RF1-547
Surgery
RD1-811
David Folk
Mark D'Agostino
Transoral robotic surgery vs. endoscopic partial midline glossectomy for obstructive sleep apnea
description Objective: To compare sleep-related outcomes in obstructive sleep apnea hypopnea syndrome (OSAHS) patients following base of tongue resection via robotic surgery and endoscopic midline glossectomy. Methods: This was a retrospective study. A total of 114 robotic and 37 endoscopic midline glossectomy surgeries were performed between July 2010 and April 2015 as part of single or multilevel surgery. Patients were excluded for indications other than sleep apnea or if complete sleep studies were not obtained. Thus, 45 robotic and 16 endoscopic surgeries were included in the analysis. Results: In the robotic surgery group there were statistically significant improvements in AHI [(44.4 ± 22.6) events/hâ(14.0 ± 3.0) events/h, P < 0.001] Epworth Sleepiness Scale (12.3 ± 4.6 to 4.5 ± 2.9, P < 0.001), and O2 nadir (82.0% ± 6.1% to 85.0% ± 5.4%, P < 0.001). In the endoscopic group there were also improvements in AHI (48.7 ± 30.2 to 27.4 ± 31.9, P = 0.06), Epworth Sleepiness Scale (12.6 ± 5.5 to 8.3 ± 4.5, P = 0.08), and O2 nadir (80.2% ± 8.6% to 82.7% ± 6.5%, P = 0.4). Surgical success rate was 75.6% and 56.3% in the robotic and endoscopic groups, respectively. Greater volume of tissue removed was predictive of surgical success in the robotic cases (10.3 vs. 8.6 ml, P = 0.02). Conclusions: Both robotic surgery and endoscopic techniques for tongue base reduction improve objective measures of sleep apnea. Greater success rates may be achieved with robotic surgery compared to traditional methods. Keywords: Sleep surgery, Transoral robotic surgery, TORS, Midline glossectomy, Partial glossectomy, Posterior glossectomy
format article
author David Folk
Mark D'Agostino
author_facet David Folk
Mark D'Agostino
author_sort David Folk
title Transoral robotic surgery vs. endoscopic partial midline glossectomy for obstructive sleep apnea
title_short Transoral robotic surgery vs. endoscopic partial midline glossectomy for obstructive sleep apnea
title_full Transoral robotic surgery vs. endoscopic partial midline glossectomy for obstructive sleep apnea
title_fullStr Transoral robotic surgery vs. endoscopic partial midline glossectomy for obstructive sleep apnea
title_full_unstemmed Transoral robotic surgery vs. endoscopic partial midline glossectomy for obstructive sleep apnea
title_sort transoral robotic surgery vs. endoscopic partial midline glossectomy for obstructive sleep apnea
publisher KeAi Communications Co., Ltd.
publishDate 2017
url https://doaj.org/article/01ebf4e867b14a6c8c8caa82e8819dd6
work_keys_str_mv AT davidfolk transoralroboticsurgeryvsendoscopicpartialmidlineglossectomyforobstructivesleepapnea
AT markdagostino transoralroboticsurgeryvsendoscopicpartialmidlineglossectomyforobstructivesleepapnea
_version_ 1718395144201306112