Otolaryngology--head and neck surgery : official journal of American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck Surgery · 2023
A Novel Method to Classify the Responses of Genioglossus to Negative Pressure in OSA Patients.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Zhou Yingqian, Yin Guoping, Xu Jinkun, Cao Xin, Ye Jingying
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: This study aims to develop a novel method to classify different genioglossus (GG) responses to upper airway (UA) negative pressure in obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) patients.
STUDY DESIGN: A single-center, prospective, cohort study.
SETTING: Sleep Medical Center.
METHODS: Patients with OSA underwent drug-induced sleep endoscopy with synchronous genioglossus electromyography (ggEMG) and UA pressure monitoring. In spontaneous obstructive apnea events, the value of epiglottis negative pressure at the end of inspiration (Pepi ) and corresponding peak phasic ggEMG were recorded as pairing data for linear regression analysis to classify GG response modes: peak phasic ggEMG-Pepi linear mode (P < .05) were classified as group 1; others (P ≥ .05) were classified as group 2. Using nasopharyngeal tube (NPT) to reopen the palatopharyngeal cavity for comparing the improvement between the OSA patients with different GG response modes.
RESULTS: Sixty subjects were analyzed for GG response modes: 22 patients were in group 1 (r2 = 0.233-0.867), and 38 patients were in group 2. The proportion of partial (63.16% vs 59.09%) or complete (36.84% vs 22.73%) collapse rate of the tongue base in group 2 was significantly higher (χ2 = 7.823, P = .020). The improvement of the apnea-hypopnea index after NPT placement in group 2 was significantly lower than in group 1 (59.09% vs 31.58%, χ2 = 4.339, P = .037).
CONCLUSION: This novel method is advantageous for distinguishing OSA patients with different GG response abilities to UA negative pressure, whose GG responses conforming to peak phasic ggEMG-Pepi linear mode might be more suitable for palatopharyngeal surgery.
STUDY DESIGN: A single-center, prospective, cohort study.
SETTING: Sleep Medical Center.
METHODS: Patients with OSA underwent drug-induced sleep endoscopy with synchronous genioglossus electromyography (ggEMG) and UA pressure monitoring. In spontaneous obstructive apnea events, the value of epiglottis negative pressure at the end of inspiration (Pepi ) and corresponding peak phasic ggEMG were recorded as pairing data for linear regression analysis to classify GG response modes: peak phasic ggEMG-Pepi linear mode (P < .05) were classified as group 1; others (P ≥ .05) were classified as group 2. Using nasopharyngeal tube (NPT) to reopen the palatopharyngeal cavity for comparing the improvement between the OSA patients with different GG response modes.
RESULTS: Sixty subjects were analyzed for GG response modes: 22 patients were in group 1 (r2 = 0.233-0.867), and 38 patients were in group 2. The proportion of partial (63.16% vs 59.09%) or complete (36.84% vs 22.73%) collapse rate of the tongue base in group 2 was significantly higher (χ2 = 7.823, P = .020). The improvement of the apnea-hypopnea index after NPT placement in group 2 was significantly lower than in group 1 (59.09% vs 31.58%, χ2 = 4.339, P = .037).
CONCLUSION: This novel method is advantageous for distinguishing OSA patients with different GG response abilities to UA negative pressure, whose GG responses conforming to peak phasic ggEMG-Pepi linear mode might be more suitable for palatopharyngeal surgery.