Palatal surgery in a transoral robotic setting (TORS): preliminary results of a retrospective comparison between uvulopalatopharyngoplasty (UPPP), expansion sphincter pharyngoplasty (ESP) and barbed repositioning pharyngoplasty (BRP)

It has become increasingly clear in the past decade that surgical management of obstructive sleep apnoea hypopnoea syndrome (OSAHS) is most successfully managed with multilevel surgery. We evaluated the outcomes of multilevel interventions comparing three different palatal techniques added to TORS:...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Acta otorhino-laryngologica italica 2017-10, Vol.37 (5), p.406-409
Hauptverfasser: Cammaroto, G, Montevecchi, F, D'Agostino, G, Zeccardo, E, Bellini, C, Meccariello, G, Vicini, C
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 409
container_issue 5
container_start_page 406
container_title Acta otorhino-laryngologica italica
container_volume 37
creator Cammaroto, G
Montevecchi, F
D'Agostino, G
Zeccardo, E
Bellini, C
Meccariello, G
Vicini, C
description It has become increasingly clear in the past decade that surgical management of obstructive sleep apnoea hypopnoea syndrome (OSAHS) is most successfully managed with multilevel surgery. We evaluated the outcomes of multilevel interventions comparing three different palatal techniques added to TORS: uvulopalatopharyngoplasty (UPPP), a modified expansion sphincter pharyngoplasty (ESP), inspired by the Pang expansion sphincter pharyngoplasty technique and the latest barbed repositioning pharyngoplasty (BRP). Thirty patients were retrospectively evaluated. Ten patients underwent UPPP by Fairbanks, 10 BRP and 10 a modified ESP already described. All patients underwent TORS, tonsillectomy and septo-turbinoplasty. For all cases, the following data were retrieved and revaluated: preoperative and postoperative apnoea-hypopnoea index (AHI), preoperative and postoperative Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), pain visual analogue scale (VAS; 0-10) for the first 5 days postoperatively, palatal operative time for each surgical technique, discharge date and complication types and rate. Both BRP and ESP resulted in better postoperative AHI values and higher surgical success rates in comparison with UPPP. On the other hand, BRP was not more effective than ESP. ESP surgery time was significantly higher than UPPP, while BRP was the quickest procedure. In summary, ESP and BRP seem to be more effective than UPPP in a multilevel surgical robotic setting. However, being quicker, easy to learn and with a low rate of complications, BRP is a safe, effective and promising option for treatment of OSAHS patients.
doi_str_mv 10.14639/0392-100X-1321
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5717986</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>1901312573</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c393t-434ba2af0e217c23c643547f5b3e1809c47a90239f8bafdc49c6095bac5373d93</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpdkktv1DAUhSNERYfCmh3yckYi1I6TOGaBBFV5SJUa9SF1ZznOzYxRxnZtZ6A_mX-BQ9sRdGXJ93z3HF2dLHtD8HtS1pQfY8qLnGB8kxNakGfZgjQFy2tW3TzPFvvhYfYyhB8Yl4w15EV2WDQVxUVVLrLfrRxllCMKk1-Dv0PaIImilyZYn7697WzUCgWIUZs1Wl6dX1yuPiDnYdRbbWRCPIRpjAHZIaEeorfBgYp6B0jZrZNeB2tQB_EngEHTbhqtm12t2yTcrK0bZYh3aHndtu3qHYJfLtnrxAS30UZF8Oip9PSyXSFpetRJ30GfbJ0NOiZoTvlU_fmiXb3KDgY5Bnj98B5l119Or06-5WfnX7-ffDrLFeU05iUtO1nIAUNBmCqoqktalWyoOgqkwVyVTHJcUD40nRx6VXJVY151UlWU0Z7To-zj_V43dVvoFZh0zVE4r7cplLBSi_8nRm_E2u5ExQjjTZ0WLB8WeHs7QYhiq4OCcZQG7BQE4ZhQUlSMJunxvVSlmwcPw96GYPG3IGLugJg7IOaCJOLtv-n2-sdG0D-v074n</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1901312573</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Palatal surgery in a transoral robotic setting (TORS): preliminary results of a retrospective comparison between uvulopalatopharyngoplasty (UPPP), expansion sphincter pharyngoplasty (ESP) and barbed repositioning pharyngoplasty (BRP)</title><source>PMC (PubMed Central)</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><creator>Cammaroto, G ; Montevecchi, F ; D'Agostino, G ; Zeccardo, E ; Bellini, C ; Meccariello, G ; Vicini, C</creator><creatorcontrib>Cammaroto, G ; Montevecchi, F ; D'Agostino, G ; Zeccardo, E ; Bellini, C ; Meccariello, G ; Vicini, C</creatorcontrib><description>It has become increasingly clear in the past decade that surgical management of obstructive sleep apnoea hypopnoea syndrome (OSAHS) is most successfully managed with multilevel surgery. We evaluated the outcomes of multilevel interventions comparing three different palatal techniques added to TORS: uvulopalatopharyngoplasty (UPPP), a modified expansion sphincter pharyngoplasty (ESP), inspired by the Pang expansion sphincter pharyngoplasty technique and the latest barbed repositioning pharyngoplasty (BRP). Thirty patients were retrospectively evaluated. Ten patients underwent UPPP by Fairbanks, 10 BRP and 10 a modified ESP already described. All patients underwent TORS, tonsillectomy and septo-turbinoplasty. For all cases, the following data were retrieved and revaluated: preoperative and postoperative apnoea-hypopnoea index (AHI), preoperative and postoperative Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), pain visual analogue scale (VAS; 0-10) for the first 5 days postoperatively, palatal operative time for each surgical technique, discharge date and complication types and rate. Both BRP and ESP resulted in better postoperative AHI values and higher surgical success rates in comparison with UPPP. On the other hand, BRP was not more effective than ESP. ESP surgery time was significantly higher than UPPP, while BRP was the quickest procedure. In summary, ESP and BRP seem to be more effective than UPPP in a multilevel surgical robotic setting. However, being quicker, easy to learn and with a low rate of complications, BRP is a safe, effective and promising option for treatment of OSAHS patients.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0392-100X</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1827-675X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.14639/0392-100X-1321</identifier><identifier>PMID: 28530254</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>Italy: Pacini Editore SRL</publisher><subject>Osahs</subject><ispartof>Acta otorhino-laryngologica italica, 2017-10, Vol.37 (5), p.406-409</ispartof><rights>Copyright by Società Italiana di Otorinolaringologia e Chirurgia Cervico-Facciale, Rome, Italy.</rights><rights>Copyright by Società Italiana di Otorinolaringologia e Chirurgia Cervico-Facciale, Rome, Italy</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c393t-434ba2af0e217c23c643547f5b3e1809c47a90239f8bafdc49c6095bac5373d93</citedby></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5717986/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5717986/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,723,776,780,881,27901,27902,53766,53768</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/28530254$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Cammaroto, G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Montevecchi, F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>D'Agostino, G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zeccardo, E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bellini, C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meccariello, G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vicini, C</creatorcontrib><title>Palatal surgery in a transoral robotic setting (TORS): preliminary results of a retrospective comparison between uvulopalatopharyngoplasty (UPPP), expansion sphincter pharyngoplasty (ESP) and barbed repositioning pharyngoplasty (BRP)</title><title>Acta otorhino-laryngologica italica</title><addtitle>Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital</addtitle><description>It has become increasingly clear in the past decade that surgical management of obstructive sleep apnoea hypopnoea syndrome (OSAHS) is most successfully managed with multilevel surgery. We evaluated the outcomes of multilevel interventions comparing three different palatal techniques added to TORS: uvulopalatopharyngoplasty (UPPP), a modified expansion sphincter pharyngoplasty (ESP), inspired by the Pang expansion sphincter pharyngoplasty technique and the latest barbed repositioning pharyngoplasty (BRP). Thirty patients were retrospectively evaluated. Ten patients underwent UPPP by Fairbanks, 10 BRP and 10 a modified ESP already described. All patients underwent TORS, tonsillectomy and septo-turbinoplasty. For all cases, the following data were retrieved and revaluated: preoperative and postoperative apnoea-hypopnoea index (AHI), preoperative and postoperative Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), pain visual analogue scale (VAS; 0-10) for the first 5 days postoperatively, palatal operative time for each surgical technique, discharge date and complication types and rate. Both BRP and ESP resulted in better postoperative AHI values and higher surgical success rates in comparison with UPPP. On the other hand, BRP was not more effective than ESP. ESP surgery time was significantly higher than UPPP, while BRP was the quickest procedure. In summary, ESP and BRP seem to be more effective than UPPP in a multilevel surgical robotic setting. However, being quicker, easy to learn and with a low rate of complications, BRP is a safe, effective and promising option for treatment of OSAHS patients.</description><subject>Osahs</subject><issn>0392-100X</issn><issn>1827-675X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2017</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNpdkktv1DAUhSNERYfCmh3yckYi1I6TOGaBBFV5SJUa9SF1ZznOzYxRxnZtZ6A_mX-BQ9sRdGXJ93z3HF2dLHtD8HtS1pQfY8qLnGB8kxNakGfZgjQFy2tW3TzPFvvhYfYyhB8Yl4w15EV2WDQVxUVVLrLfrRxllCMKk1-Dv0PaIImilyZYn7697WzUCgWIUZs1Wl6dX1yuPiDnYdRbbWRCPIRpjAHZIaEeorfBgYp6B0jZrZNeB2tQB_EngEHTbhqtm12t2yTcrK0bZYh3aHndtu3qHYJfLtnrxAS30UZF8Oip9PSyXSFpetRJ30GfbJ0NOiZoTvlU_fmiXb3KDgY5Bnj98B5l119Or06-5WfnX7-ffDrLFeU05iUtO1nIAUNBmCqoqktalWyoOgqkwVyVTHJcUD40nRx6VXJVY151UlWU0Z7To-zj_V43dVvoFZh0zVE4r7cplLBSi_8nRm_E2u5ExQjjTZ0WLB8WeHs7QYhiq4OCcZQG7BQE4ZhQUlSMJunxvVSlmwcPw96GYPG3IGLugJg7IOaCJOLtv-n2-sdG0D-v074n</recordid><startdate>201710</startdate><enddate>201710</enddate><creator>Cammaroto, G</creator><creator>Montevecchi, F</creator><creator>D'Agostino, G</creator><creator>Zeccardo, E</creator><creator>Bellini, C</creator><creator>Meccariello, G</creator><creator>Vicini, C</creator><general>Pacini Editore SRL</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201710</creationdate><title>Palatal surgery in a transoral robotic setting (TORS): preliminary results of a retrospective comparison between uvulopalatopharyngoplasty (UPPP), expansion sphincter pharyngoplasty (ESP) and barbed repositioning pharyngoplasty (BRP)</title><author>Cammaroto, G ; Montevecchi, F ; D'Agostino, G ; Zeccardo, E ; Bellini, C ; Meccariello, G ; Vicini, C</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c393t-434ba2af0e217c23c643547f5b3e1809c47a90239f8bafdc49c6095bac5373d93</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2017</creationdate><topic>Osahs</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Cammaroto, G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Montevecchi, F</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>D'Agostino, G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Zeccardo, E</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Bellini, C</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Meccariello, G</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vicini, C</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Acta otorhino-laryngologica italica</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Cammaroto, G</au><au>Montevecchi, F</au><au>D'Agostino, G</au><au>Zeccardo, E</au><au>Bellini, C</au><au>Meccariello, G</au><au>Vicini, C</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Palatal surgery in a transoral robotic setting (TORS): preliminary results of a retrospective comparison between uvulopalatopharyngoplasty (UPPP), expansion sphincter pharyngoplasty (ESP) and barbed repositioning pharyngoplasty (BRP)</atitle><jtitle>Acta otorhino-laryngologica italica</jtitle><addtitle>Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital</addtitle><date>2017-10</date><risdate>2017</risdate><volume>37</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>406</spage><epage>409</epage><pages>406-409</pages><issn>0392-100X</issn><eissn>1827-675X</eissn><abstract>It has become increasingly clear in the past decade that surgical management of obstructive sleep apnoea hypopnoea syndrome (OSAHS) is most successfully managed with multilevel surgery. We evaluated the outcomes of multilevel interventions comparing three different palatal techniques added to TORS: uvulopalatopharyngoplasty (UPPP), a modified expansion sphincter pharyngoplasty (ESP), inspired by the Pang expansion sphincter pharyngoplasty technique and the latest barbed repositioning pharyngoplasty (BRP). Thirty patients were retrospectively evaluated. Ten patients underwent UPPP by Fairbanks, 10 BRP and 10 a modified ESP already described. All patients underwent TORS, tonsillectomy and septo-turbinoplasty. For all cases, the following data were retrieved and revaluated: preoperative and postoperative apnoea-hypopnoea index (AHI), preoperative and postoperative Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), pain visual analogue scale (VAS; 0-10) for the first 5 days postoperatively, palatal operative time for each surgical technique, discharge date and complication types and rate. Both BRP and ESP resulted in better postoperative AHI values and higher surgical success rates in comparison with UPPP. On the other hand, BRP was not more effective than ESP. ESP surgery time was significantly higher than UPPP, while BRP was the quickest procedure. In summary, ESP and BRP seem to be more effective than UPPP in a multilevel surgical robotic setting. However, being quicker, easy to learn and with a low rate of complications, BRP is a safe, effective and promising option for treatment of OSAHS patients.</abstract><cop>Italy</cop><pub>Pacini Editore SRL</pub><pmid>28530254</pmid><doi>10.14639/0392-100X-1321</doi><tpages>4</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0392-100X
ispartof Acta otorhino-laryngologica italica, 2017-10, Vol.37 (5), p.406-409
issn 0392-100X
1827-675X
language eng
recordid cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_5717986
source PMC (PubMed Central); EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals
subjects Osahs
title Palatal surgery in a transoral robotic setting (TORS): preliminary results of a retrospective comparison between uvulopalatopharyngoplasty (UPPP), expansion sphincter pharyngoplasty (ESP) and barbed repositioning pharyngoplasty (BRP)
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-01T03%3A46%3A16IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Palatal%20surgery%20in%20a%20transoral%20robotic%20setting%20(TORS):%20preliminary%20results%20of%20a%20retrospective%20comparison%20between%20uvulopalatopharyngoplasty%20(UPPP),%20expansion%20sphincter%20pharyngoplasty%20(ESP)%20and%20barbed%20repositioning%20pharyngoplasty%20(BRP)&rft.jtitle=Acta%20otorhino-laryngologica%20italica&rft.au=Cammaroto,%20G&rft.date=2017-10&rft.volume=37&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=406&rft.epage=409&rft.pages=406-409&rft.issn=0392-100X&rft.eissn=1827-675X&rft_id=info:doi/10.14639/0392-100X-1321&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E1901312573%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1901312573&rft_id=info:pmid/28530254&rfr_iscdi=true