• Home
  • Practice Focus
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
    • How I Do It
    • TRIO Best Practices
  • Business of Medicine
    • Health Policy
    • Legal Matters
    • Practice Management
    • Tech Talk
    • AI
  • Literature Reviews
    • Facial Plastic/Reconstructive
    • Head and Neck
    • Laryngology
    • Otology/Neurotology
    • Pediatric
    • Rhinology
    • Sleep Medicine
  • Career
    • Medical Education
    • Professional Development
    • Resident Focus
  • ENT Perspectives
    • ENT Expressions
    • Everyday Ethics
    • From TRIO
    • The Great Debate
    • Letter From the Editor
    • Rx: Wellness
    • The Voice
    • Viewpoint
  • TRIO Resources
    • Triological Society
    • The Laryngoscope
    • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
    • TRIO Combined Sections Meetings
    • COSM
    • Related Otolaryngology Events
  • Search

Obstructive Sleep Apnea Treatment Covered at Sleep Meeting

by Mary Beth Nierengarten • August 1, 2014

  • Tweet
  • Click to email a link to a friend (Opens in new window) Email
Print-Friendly Version

Efficacy of the device was assessed using objective measures based on the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) and oxygen desaturation index (ODI) (primary outcomes), as well as on subjective measures using the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) and the Functional Outcomes of Sleep Questionnaire (FOSQ).

You Might Also Like

  • Hypoglossal Nerve Stimulation May Be Effective in Obstructive Sleep Apnea
  • How Treatment for Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA) Is Evolving to Give Patients a Better Night’s Sleep
  • Adding Enhanced Measurements to Drug-Induced Sleep Endoscopy Aids in Distinguishing Central from Obstructive Sleep Apnea in Patients
  • Ansa Cervicalis Stimulation a Viable Ancillary Treatment for Some Patients with Obstructive Sleep Apnea
Explore This Issue
August 2014

At 12 months, the study showed significant reductions in AHI and ODI. The AHI score decreased by 68%, from 29.3 events per hour at baseline to 9.0 events per hour at 12 months (P<0.001), and the ODI decreased by 70% from 25.4 events per hour at baseline to 7.4 events at 12 months (P<0.001). Significant changes were also seen from baseline to 12 months in ESS (decrease from 11.0 to 6.0, P<0.0001) and FOSQ (increase from 14.6 to 18.2, P<0.0001).

“Across the entire group, sleep apnea severity was reduced from the moderate-severe range to the mild range, which suggests good reduction in cardiovascular and health risks,” said Dr. Soose, who is a STAR trial investigator. Additional benefits seen in many patients, he said, included improvements in snoring, daytime sleepiness, and quality of life measures.

The study also showed a very good safety profile for the device, he said, with a less than 1% serious adverse event rate, very little post-operative discomfort, and minimal downtime.

New data: 18-month follow-up of STAR trial. After the 12-month follow-up period, the trial included a second phase, in which the first 26 consecutive responders were randomized 1:1 to either continuation on the device (therapy maintenance) or discontinuation of the device (therapy withdrawal).

Kingman Strohl, MD, director of the Sleep Medicine Fellowship Program at University Hospitals Case Medical Center and professor of medicine at Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine and University Hospitals Case Medical Center in Cleveland, Ohio, the senior author of the STAR study, presented updated results at 18 months follow-up on this group of patients. He said the results show a sustained benefit, reducing OSA severity and improving quality of life through 18 months, with a surgical response rate of about 70%. Overall, 123 patients remain active users of the device.

Results also showed that a one-week withdrawal from the therapy resulted in worsening of OSA and symptoms.

Similar to the 12-month data, the device was found to be safe over the longer duration of use, with few to no new adverse events seen between 12 and 18 months. Overall, over the entire 18 months, about 1.6% device-related adverse events were reported, but these were minor and did not stop patient use, said Dr. Strohl.

Pages: 1 2 3 4 | Single Page

Filed Under: Features, Sleep Medicine Tagged With: Obstructive sleep apnea, sleepIssue: August 2014

You Might Also Like:

  • Hypoglossal Nerve Stimulation May Be Effective in Obstructive Sleep Apnea
  • How Treatment for Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA) Is Evolving to Give Patients a Better Night’s Sleep
  • Adding Enhanced Measurements to Drug-Induced Sleep Endoscopy Aids in Distinguishing Central from Obstructive Sleep Apnea in Patients
  • Ansa Cervicalis Stimulation a Viable Ancillary Treatment for Some Patients with Obstructive Sleep Apnea

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

The Triological SocietyENTtoday is a publication of The Triological Society.

Polls

Would you choose a concierge physician as your PCP?

View Results

Loading ... Loading ...
  • Polls Archive

Top Articles for Residents

  • Applications Open for Resident Members of ENTtoday Edit Board
  • How To Provide Helpful Feedback To Residents
  • Call for Resident Bowl Questions
  • New Standardized Otolaryngology Curriculum Launching July 1 Should Be Valuable Resource For Physicians Around The World
  • Do Training Programs Give Otolaryngology Residents the Necessary Tools to Do Productive Research?
  • Popular this Week
  • Most Popular
  • Most Recent
    • A Journey Through Pay Inequity: A Physician’s Firsthand Account

    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • Is Middle Ear Pressure Affected by Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Use?

    • The Dramatic Rise in Tongue Tie and Lip Tie Treatment

    • Rating Laryngopharyngeal Reflux Severity: How Do Two Common Instruments Compare?

    • Is Middle Ear Pressure Affected by Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Use?

    • Otolaryngologists Are Still Debating the Effectiveness of Tongue Tie Treatment

    • Complications for When Physicians Change a Maiden Name

    • Excitement Around Gene Therapy for Hearing Restoration
    • “Small” Acts of Kindness
    • How To: Endoscopic Total Maxillectomy Without Facial Skin Incision
    • Science Communities Must Speak Out When Policies Threaten Health and Safety
    • Observation Most Cost-Effective in Addressing AECRS in Absence of Bacterial Infection

Follow Us

  • Contact Us
  • About Us
  • Advertise
  • The Triological Society
  • The Laryngoscope
  • Laryngoscope Investigative Otolaryngology
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Use
  • Cookies

Wiley

Copyright © 2025 by John Wiley & Sons, Inc. All rights reserved, including rights for text and data mining and training of artificial technologies or similar technologies. ISSN 1559-4939