Amira A M M Attia, Mai A Haggag, Wael Said Ahmed, Aiman El-Saed, Mennatalla A M Saleh, Abdelbaset M Saleh
{"title":"葡萄糖前驱疗法与低水平激光疗法治疗阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停综合征的比较一项随机对照试验。","authors":"Amira A M M Attia, Mai A Haggag, Wael Said Ahmed, Aiman El-Saed, Mennatalla A M Saleh, Abdelbaset M Saleh","doi":"10.1007/s11325-025-03428-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the effects of Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) versus dextrose prolotherapy injection in the treatment of patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A hospital-based randomized controlled trial was conducted among 26 OSA patients; 13 in each group. After confirmation with Polysomnography and evaluation by drug induced sleep endoscopy, the patients were randomly allocated to treatment groups. Treatment success was defined as > 50% reduction of apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) with residual AHI < 10. The outcomes were evaluated 3 months after the intervention.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 26 patients completed the study. The average age was 40.1 ± 7.3 years and 73.1% of the participants were males. Compared with LLLT group before intervention, prolotherapy group had higher reduction of sleep apnea measurements including total apnea, total hypopnea, and low O2 saturation but had slightly lower reduction of average O2 saturation and significant increase in minimal O2 saturation. In both groups, the levels of AHI were significantly reduced after intervention without complication (68% reduction, p = 0.001 in the prolotherapy group and 46% reduction, p = 0.001 in LLLT group). In linear models, the reduction was higher in prolotherapy group even after adjusting to baseline AHI (p = 0.011). Treatment success was much higher in the prolotherapy group than LLLT group (53.8% versus 7.7%, p = 0.030). The treatment success was significantly associated with single level obstruction (velum) and partial obstruction.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both dextrose prolotherapy and LLLT were successful in reducing sleep parameters associated with OSA, with better reduction in the prolotherapy group. The promising findings need to be confirmed in larger multicenter studies before final recommendation.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>The study was listed on www.</p><p><strong>Clinicaltrials: </strong>gov with registration number (NCT06427161) on 23/05/2024.</p>","PeriodicalId":520777,"journal":{"name":"Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung","volume":"29 5","pages":"272"},"PeriodicalIF":2.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Dextrose prolotherapy versus low level laser therapy in the treatment of patients with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome; a randomized controlled trial.\",\"authors\":\"Amira A M M Attia, Mai A Haggag, Wael Said Ahmed, Aiman El-Saed, Mennatalla A M Saleh, Abdelbaset M Saleh\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s11325-025-03428-7\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To compare the effects of Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) versus dextrose prolotherapy injection in the treatment of patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA).</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A hospital-based randomized controlled trial was conducted among 26 OSA patients; 13 in each group. After confirmation with Polysomnography and evaluation by drug induced sleep endoscopy, the patients were randomly allocated to treatment groups. Treatment success was defined as > 50% reduction of apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) with residual AHI < 10. The outcomes were evaluated 3 months after the intervention.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 26 patients completed the study. The average age was 40.1 ± 7.3 years and 73.1% of the participants were males. Compared with LLLT group before intervention, prolotherapy group had higher reduction of sleep apnea measurements including total apnea, total hypopnea, and low O2 saturation but had slightly lower reduction of average O2 saturation and significant increase in minimal O2 saturation. In both groups, the levels of AHI were significantly reduced after intervention without complication (68% reduction, p = 0.001 in the prolotherapy group and 46% reduction, p = 0.001 in LLLT group). In linear models, the reduction was higher in prolotherapy group even after adjusting to baseline AHI (p = 0.011). Treatment success was much higher in the prolotherapy group than LLLT group (53.8% versus 7.7%, p = 0.030). The treatment success was significantly associated with single level obstruction (velum) and partial obstruction.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Both dextrose prolotherapy and LLLT were successful in reducing sleep parameters associated with OSA, with better reduction in the prolotherapy group. The promising findings need to be confirmed in larger multicenter studies before final recommendation.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>The study was listed on www.</p><p><strong>Clinicaltrials: </strong>gov with registration number (NCT06427161) on 23/05/2024.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":520777,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung\",\"volume\":\"29 5\",\"pages\":\"272\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-08-12\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11325-025-03428-7\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s11325-025-03428-7","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
Dextrose prolotherapy versus low level laser therapy in the treatment of patients with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome; a randomized controlled trial.
Objective: To compare the effects of Low-level laser therapy (LLLT) versus dextrose prolotherapy injection in the treatment of patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA).
Methods: A hospital-based randomized controlled trial was conducted among 26 OSA patients; 13 in each group. After confirmation with Polysomnography and evaluation by drug induced sleep endoscopy, the patients were randomly allocated to treatment groups. Treatment success was defined as > 50% reduction of apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) with residual AHI < 10. The outcomes were evaluated 3 months after the intervention.
Results: A total of 26 patients completed the study. The average age was 40.1 ± 7.3 years and 73.1% of the participants were males. Compared with LLLT group before intervention, prolotherapy group had higher reduction of sleep apnea measurements including total apnea, total hypopnea, and low O2 saturation but had slightly lower reduction of average O2 saturation and significant increase in minimal O2 saturation. In both groups, the levels of AHI were significantly reduced after intervention without complication (68% reduction, p = 0.001 in the prolotherapy group and 46% reduction, p = 0.001 in LLLT group). In linear models, the reduction was higher in prolotherapy group even after adjusting to baseline AHI (p = 0.011). Treatment success was much higher in the prolotherapy group than LLLT group (53.8% versus 7.7%, p = 0.030). The treatment success was significantly associated with single level obstruction (velum) and partial obstruction.
Conclusions: Both dextrose prolotherapy and LLLT were successful in reducing sleep parameters associated with OSA, with better reduction in the prolotherapy group. The promising findings need to be confirmed in larger multicenter studies before final recommendation.
Trial registration: The study was listed on www.
Clinicaltrials: gov with registration number (NCT06427161) on 23/05/2024.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
