Effectiveness of Palatopharyngeal Surgery Modifications in Obstructive Sleep Apnea: A Meta-analysis.

IF 1.8 Q2 OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY
OTO Open Pub Date : 2025-06-19 eCollection Date: 2025-04-01 DOI:10.1002/oto2.70144
Samuel Tschopp, Flora Meinert, Georgios Mantokoudis, Marco Caversaccio, Urs Borner
{"title":"Effectiveness of Palatopharyngeal Surgery Modifications in Obstructive Sleep Apnea: A Meta-analysis.","authors":"Samuel Tschopp, Flora Meinert, Georgios Mantokoudis, Marco Caversaccio, Urs Borner","doi":"10.1002/oto2.70144","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The effectiveness of various palatopharyngeal surgeries is currently poorly understood. This study compares various palatopharyngeal surgery techniques without tonsillectomy for reducing the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI).</p><p><strong>Data sources: </strong>Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform.</p><p><strong>Review methods: </strong>We included studies of palatopharyngeal surgery in adults reporting AHI outcomes, excluding those with tonsillectomy or combined surgeries. A random-effects model was used to pool effect sizes. Surgical techniques were categorized into cold steel, muscle relocation, suture, radiofrequency, laser, powered instruments, and implants. The primary outcome was the reduction in AHI. Secondary outcomes were the AHI responder rate, AHI reduction over the follow-up duration, and the outcomes by publication year.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>From 3793 screened records, 45 studies with 1501 patients were included. Overall, palatopharyngeal surgery reduced AHI by 5.2/h (95% CI, 2.7-7.7; <i>P</i> < .0001). Powered instruments showed the greatest AHI reduction (26.3/h; 95% CI, 18.9-33.7), followed by muscle relocation (20.2/h; 95% CI, 3.7-36.7) and suture techniques (15.3/h; 95% CI, 9.6-21.0). Palatal implants (2.6/h; 95% CI, 0.4-4.7) and laser techniques (4.5/h; 95% CI, 1.3-7.8) showed modest effects, whereas radiofrequency (0.4/h; 95% CI, -2.0 to 2.8) and cold steel (6.6/h; 95% CI, -0.2 to 13.5) had no significant impact. The overall responder rate was 51% (95% CI, 41-60), with powered instruments, relocation, and suture techniques demonstrating the highest rates.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Palatopharyngeal surgery techniques significantly differ in reducing AHI. Powered instruments, muscle relocation, and suture techniques are most effective.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>PROSPERO identifier: CRD42024559063.</p>","PeriodicalId":19697,"journal":{"name":"OTO Open","volume":"9 2","pages":"e70144"},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12177786/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"OTO Open","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/oto2.70144","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/4/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"OTORHINOLARYNGOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The effectiveness of various palatopharyngeal surgeries is currently poorly understood. This study compares various palatopharyngeal surgery techniques without tonsillectomy for reducing the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI).

Data sources: Embase, MEDLINE, Web of Science, ClinicalTrials, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, and International Clinical Trials Registry Platform.

Review methods: We included studies of palatopharyngeal surgery in adults reporting AHI outcomes, excluding those with tonsillectomy or combined surgeries. A random-effects model was used to pool effect sizes. Surgical techniques were categorized into cold steel, muscle relocation, suture, radiofrequency, laser, powered instruments, and implants. The primary outcome was the reduction in AHI. Secondary outcomes were the AHI responder rate, AHI reduction over the follow-up duration, and the outcomes by publication year.

Results: From 3793 screened records, 45 studies with 1501 patients were included. Overall, palatopharyngeal surgery reduced AHI by 5.2/h (95% CI, 2.7-7.7; P < .0001). Powered instruments showed the greatest AHI reduction (26.3/h; 95% CI, 18.9-33.7), followed by muscle relocation (20.2/h; 95% CI, 3.7-36.7) and suture techniques (15.3/h; 95% CI, 9.6-21.0). Palatal implants (2.6/h; 95% CI, 0.4-4.7) and laser techniques (4.5/h; 95% CI, 1.3-7.8) showed modest effects, whereas radiofrequency (0.4/h; 95% CI, -2.0 to 2.8) and cold steel (6.6/h; 95% CI, -0.2 to 13.5) had no significant impact. The overall responder rate was 51% (95% CI, 41-60), with powered instruments, relocation, and suture techniques demonstrating the highest rates.

Conclusion: Palatopharyngeal surgery techniques significantly differ in reducing AHI. Powered instruments, muscle relocation, and suture techniques are most effective.

Trial registration: PROSPERO identifier: CRD42024559063.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

腭咽手术改良治疗阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停的有效性:一项荟萃分析。
目的:目前对各种腭咽手术的疗效了解甚少。本研究比较了不切除扁桃体的腭咽手术技术降低呼吸暂停低通气指数(AHI)的效果。数据来源:Embase、MEDLINE、Web of Science、ClinicalTrials、CINAHL、Cochrane Library和国际临床试验注册平台。回顾方法:我们纳入了报告AHI结局的成人腭咽手术的研究,不包括扁桃体切除术或联合手术的研究。随机效应模型用于汇总效应大小。手术技术分为冷钢、肌肉移位、缝合、射频、激光、动力器械和植入物。主要结果是AHI降低。次要结局是AHI应答率,随访期间AHI降低,以及出版年份的结局。结果:从3793份筛选记录中,纳入了45项研究,1501名患者。总体而言,腭咽手术使AHI降低5.2/h (95% CI, 2.7-7.7;结论:腭咽手术技术在降低AHI方面存在显著差异。动力器械、肌肉移位和缝合技术是最有效的。试验注册:PROSPERO标识符:CRD42024559063。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
OTO Open
OTO Open Medicine-Surgery
CiteScore
2.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
115
审稿时长
15 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信