0535 Upper Airway Stimulation for Obstructive Sleep Apnea - Results from the Adhere Registry. (27th April 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Doghramji, K; Schwab, R; Strollo, P; Mehra, R; Strohl, K; Iber, C
• Is Part Of: Sleep. Volume 41(2018)Supplement 1
• Page Start: A200
• Page End: A200
• Publication Date: 2018-04-27
• Subjects: Sleep -- Physiological aspects -- Periodicals; Sleep disorders -- Periodicals; Sommeil -- Aspect physiologique -- Périodiques; Sommeil, Troubles du -- Périodiques; Sleep disorders; Sleep -- Physiological aspects; Sleep -- physiological aspects; Sleep Wake Disorders; Psychophysiology; Electronic journals; Periodicals; 616.8498
• DOI: 10.1093/sleep/zsy061.534
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 0161-8105

Abstract

Abstract: Introduction: Upper airway stimulation (UAS) is an alternative to continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) for the treatment of moderate to severe obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). The Adhere Registry collects retrospective and prospective outcome measures in UAS patients in institutions in the US and Germany. We hypothesized that UAS is safe and effective in routine clinical practice. Methods: This multicenter, observational, registry enrolled 430 patients between October 2016 and Dec 2017. Baseline demographic and sleep study data were collected. Objective and subjective treatment outcomes, device and procedural adverse events, and patient and physician satisfaction were also reviewed. Results: Average apnea hypopnea index (AHI) decreased from 36.5 ± 15.7 to 10.6 ± 12.0 events/hour (p<0.0001) and Epworth Sleepiness Scale score decreased from 11.8 ± 5.5 to 6.6 ± 4.7 (p<0.0001) from baseline to 12-month post-implant. Patients utilized therapy for 5.7 ± 2.1 hours per night. 2% of patients experienced procedure-related complications (one reported as severe due to a displacement of the cuff lead requiring revision), and 21% reported therapy- related adverse events (one reported as severe for strong electrical stimulation). All other adverse events were reported as mild. Clinical global impression scores demonstrated that most physicians (91%) observed improvement in their patients' symptoms with therapy. Most patients (93%) were more satisfied with UAS than CPAP. Conclusion: Across a multi-institutional international registry, UAS therapy demonstrates significant improvement in subjective and objective OSA outcome measures, therapy adherence which exceeds that typically observed with CPAP, and high overall patient satisfaction compared to CPAP. Complications and adverse events were infrequent and mostly mild in nature. Support (If Any): Support provided by Inspire.