Long‐Term Generator Replacement Experience in Hypoglossal Nerve Stimulator Therapy Recipients With CPAP‐Intolerant Obstructive Sleep Apnea

Objective In the last decade, hypoglossal nerve stimulation (HNS) has emerged as a therapeutic alternative for patients with obstructive sleep apnea. The original clinical trial cohorts are entering the phase of expected battery depletion (8‐12 years). This study aimed to examine the surgical experi...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Otolaryngology-head and neck surgery 2023-10, Vol.169 (4), p.1064-1069
Hauptverfasser: Magaña, Linda C., Strollo, Patrick J., Steffen, Armin, Ravesloot, Madeline, Maanen, Peter, Harrison, Christine, Maurer, Joachim T., Soose, Ryan J.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Objective In the last decade, hypoglossal nerve stimulation (HNS) has emerged as a therapeutic alternative for patients with obstructive sleep apnea. The original clinical trial cohorts are entering the phase of expected battery depletion (8‐12 years). This study aimed to examine the surgical experience with implantable pulse generator (IPG) replacements and the associated long‐term therapy outcomes. Study Design Retrospective analysis of patients from the original clinical trial databases (STAR, German post‐market) who were followed in the ongoing ADHERE registry. Setting International multicenter HNS registry. Methods The ADHERE registry and clinical trial databases were cross‐referenced to identify the serial numbers of IPGs that were replaced. Data collection included demographics, apnea‐hypopnea index (AHI), therapy use, operative times, and adverse events. Results Fourteen patients underwent IPG replacement 8.3 ± 1.1 years after their initial implantation. Body mass index was unchanged between the original implant and IPG replacement (29 ± 4 vs 28 ± 2 kg/m2, p = .50). The mean IPG replacement operative time was shorter than the original implant (63 ± 50 vs 154 ± 58 minutes, p 
ISSN:0194-5998
1097-6817
DOI:10.1002/ohn.340