Добавил:
Sekretar
kiopkiopkiop18@yandex.ru
t.me/Prokururor I Вовсе не секретарь, но почту проверяю
Опубликованный материал нарушает ваши авторские права? Сообщите нам.
Вуз:
Предмет:
Файл:Ординатура / Хирургия / Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана / Книга_4421_Библиотеки_им_академика_М_И_Перельмана.pdf
X
- •Contents
- •Contributors
- •1.6 Mixed Disorders
- •1.7 Isolated Symptoms
- •1.7.1 Snoring
- •1.7.2 Catathrenia
- •1.8 Summary
- •References
- •1.1 Introduction
- •1.2 Obstructive Sleep Apnea
- •1.2.1 Obstructive Sleep Apnea, Adult
- •1.2.2 Obstructive Sleep Apnea, Pediatric
- •1.3 Central Sleep Apnea
- •1.3.5 Primary Central Sleep Apnea
- •1.5 Sleep-Related Hypoxemia Disorder
- •2.7 Summary
- •References
- •3: Health Consequences of Obstructive Sleep Apnea
- •3.1 Cardiovascular Consequences
- •3.1.1 Chronic Heart Failure
- •3.1.2 Systemic Hypertension
- •3.1.3 Coronary Heart Disease
- •3.1.4 Arrhythmias
- •3.1.5 Cerebrovascular Disease
- •3.2 Respiratory Consequences
- •3.2.1 Asthma
- •3.2.3 Pulmonary Embolism
- •3.2.4 Pulmonary Hypertension
- •3.3.1 Diabetes Mellitus
- •3.3.2 Metabolic Syndrome
- •3.3.3 Sexual Dysfunction
- •3.4 Gastrointestinal Consequences
- •3.4.2 Nonalcoholic Fatty Liver Disease
- •3.5 Obstetric Outcomes
- •3.5.2 Gestational Diabetes
- •3.5.4 Maternal Surgical Complications
- •3.6 Perinatal Outcomes
- •3.6.1 Impaired Fetal Growth
- •3.6.2 Preterm Birth
- •3.6.4 Stillbirth
- •3.6.5 NICU Admission
- •3.7 Perioperative Outcomes
- •3.8 Accident-Related Consequences
- •3.9 Cancer-Related Outcomes
- •3.10 Survival Outcomes
- •3.10.1 Overall Mortality
- •3.10.2 Cardiovascular Death
- •3.10.4 Perioperative Mortality
- •References
- •4.1 Patient Case
- •4.2 Introduction
- •4.3 History
- •4.4.1 Oxygen
- •4.4.2 Vascular
- •4.4.3 Endocrine
- •4.6.1 Attention & Executive Function
- •4.6.4 Visual-Spatial
- •4.7 Summary
- •References
- •5.1 Introduction
- •5.2 Obesity
- •5.3 Hypertension
- •5.4 Diabetes Mellitus
- •5.5 Fatty Liver Disease
- •5.6 Conclusions
- •References
- •6.1 Background
- •6.2 History Taking
- •6.3 Physical Examination
- •6.4 Conclusion
- •References
- •Further Reading
- •7.1 Background
- •7.2.2 Screening Tools
- •7.2.3 Diagnostic Tests
- •7.2.7 Clinical Guidelines
- •7.3 Home Sleep Apnea Test (HSAT)
- •7.3.1 Advantages
- •7.3.2 Disadvantages
- •7.3.3 Patient Selection
- •7.3.4 Data Obtained
- •7.3.8 Recommended Follow-Up
- •7.3.9 Clinical Outcomes
- •7.4 Polysomnography (PSG)
- •7.4.1 Patient Selection
- •7.4.4 Follow-Up
- •7.5 Conclusions
- •Further Reading
- •8.1 Introduction
- •8.4 CBCT and OSA
- •8.5.1 CPAP
- •8.5.2 Oral Appliances
- •8.5.3 Maxillomandibular Advancement
- •8.6 Upper Airway Stimulation
- •8.7 Summary
- •References
- •9.1.1.1 Cranial Base Lengthening
- •9.1.1.2 Cranial Base Flexion
- •9.1.5.3 Tongue Growth
- •References
- •10.2.1.1 Cranial Base
- •10.2.1.2 Facial Height
- •10.2.1.4 Pharyngeal Airway Space
- •10.2.1.6 Hyoid Bone Position
- •10.3.1 Maxillary Expansion
- •10.3.1.4 RME for OSA
- •References
- •11.2 Pathophysiology
- •11.3 Clinical Exam
- •11.5 Treatment
- •11.6 Summary
- •References
- •12.1 Introduction
- •12.5 Mask Options
- •12.6.1 Dry Mouth
- •12.6.2 Tangled Tubing
- •12.6.3 Condensation
- •12.6.4 Headgear Problems
- •12.6.6 Ramp
- •12.6.7 Cleaning Equipment
- •12.6.8 Skin Irritation
- •12.6.9 Nasal Congestion
- •12.6.10 Aerophagia
- •12.7 Cleaning Equipment
- •12.7.1 Travel Options
- •References
- •13: Oral Appliance Therapy
- •13.1 Introduction
- •13.2 Terminology
- •13.3.2 Device Designs
- •13.4 Methodology
- •13.7.2 Device Design
- •13.7.5 Non-anatomical Traits
- •13.7.6 Disease Severity
- •13.7.7 Supine Dependency
- •13.12.3 Adherence
- •13.12.4 Mean Disease Alleviation
- •13.13 Long-Term Outcomes
- •13.16 Guidelines
- •References
- •14.1 Introduction
- •14.2 Positional Therapy
- •14.2.1 Weight Loss
- •14.2.2 Nasal EPAP Therapy
- •14.2.3 Oral Pressure Therapy
- •14.2.4 Hypoglossal Nerve Stimulation
- •References
- •15.1 Introduction: Background Information
- •15.4 Preoperative Assessment
- •15.4.1 Physical Examination
- •15.4.2 Polysomnography
- •15.4.3 Clinical History
- •15.5 Preoperative Consent
- •15.6 Preoperative Assessment
- •15.6.1 Surgical Setting
- •15.8 Instrumentation
- •15.8.1 Tonsillectomy
- •15.8.2 Adenoidectomy
- •15.9 Postoperative Management
- •15.9.1 Pain
- •15.9.2 Diet
- •15.9.3 Follow-Up
- •15.10 Expected Outcomes by Population
- •15.10.1 General Population
- •15.10.2 Complex Children
- •15.10.2.1 Obese Children
- •15.10.2.2 Down Syndrome
- •15.10.2.3 Craniofacial Syndromes
- •15.10.2.4 Synchronous Airway Lesion
- •15.11.3 Cardiovascular Parameters
- •15.13 Conclusion
- •References
- •Further Reading
- •16.1 Introduction
- •16.3.1 Anatomic Factors
- •16.8 Summary
- •References
- •17: Palatal Surgery for OSA Patients
- •17.1 Introduction
- •17.2.2 Nasopharyngeal Endoscopy
- •17.2.3 Cephalometrics
- •17.3.1.1 Success Rate of UPPP
- •17.3.1.2 Limitations of UPPP
- •17.3.1.3 Impact of UPPP
- •17.3.1.4 Complications of UPPP
- •17.3.2.2 Z-Palatopharyngoplasty
- •17.3.2.3 Expansion Sphincter Pharyngoplasty
- •References
- •18: Hypopharyngeal Surgery for OSA Patients
- •18.1 Introduction
- •18.2 Historical Perspective
- •18.3 Patient Selection
- •18.4 Physical Exam
- •18.5 Imaging I
- •18.5.1 Imaging
- •18.6 Drug-Induced Sedated Endoscopy
- •18.7 Treatment Algorithm
- •18.8 Procedures
- •18.8.1 Transoral Robotic Surgery
- •18.8.2 Radiofrequency Ablation (RFA)
- •18.8.3 Genioglossus Advancement
- •18.8.4 Tongue Base Suspension
- •18.8.5 Hyoid Suspension
- •18.8.7 Hypoglossal Nerve Stimulators
- •18.9 Future Directions
- •References
- •Suggested Reading
- •19.1.1 Imaging
- •19.2.1.1 Pierre Robin Sequence
- •19.2.1.2 Craniofacial Microsomia
- •19.2.2.1 Crouzon’s Syndrome
- •19.2.2.2 Apert Syndrome
- •19.2.3.1 Treacher Collins Syndrome
- •19.2.3.2 Goldenhar Syndrome
- •19.3 Surgical Correction
- •Bibliography
- •20.1 Introduction
- •20.4.2 Surgical Technique (DOME)
- •20.4.4 Consolidation Phase
- •20.6 Discussion
- •References
- •21.3.3 Maxillomandibular Setback
- •References
- •22.1 Introduction
- •22.3 Results
- •22.3.1 Success Rate
- •22.4 Cases
- •22.5 Discussion
- •22.6 Conclusion
- •References
- •23.1 Patient Evaluation
- •23.1.1 Patient Concerns
- •23.1.4 Facial Evaluation
- •23.1.5 Lateral View
- •23.1.6 Oral Examination
- •23.1.7 Periodontal Evaluation
- •23.1.8 Tongue Assessment
- •23.1.9 Temporomandibular Joint
- •23.1.10 The Nose
- •23.1.11 Oropharyngeal Airway Assessment
- •23.2 Radiographic Evaluation
- •23.2.2 Lateral Cephalometric Radiograph
- •23.2.5 Cephalometric Analysis
- •23.3 Dental Model Analysis
- •23.3.1 Arch Length Measurements
- •23.3.2 Tooth Size Analysis
- •23.3.3 Tooth Position
- •23.3.4 Arch Width Analysis
- •23.3.6 Cuspid-Molar Position
- •23.3.7 Tooth Arch Symmetry
- •23.3.10 Ankylosed Teeth
- •23.4 Summary
- •References
- •24.1 TMJ Articular Disc Displacement
- •24.3 Reactive Arthritis (ReA)
- •24.5 Trauma
- •24.6 TMJ Ankylosis
- •24.7 Other End-Stage TMJ Conditions
- •24.8 Summary
- •References
- •25.1 Background
- •25.2 Treatment Planning Maxillary Surgery
- •25.2.1 Bone Anatomy
- •25.2.2 Vascular Anatomy
- •25.5 Adjunct Procedures
- •25.6 Complications
- •References
- •26: Mandibular Surgical Procedures
- •26.1 Genioplasty Procedures
- •26.2 Osseous Genioplasty
- •26.2.1 Anteroposterior Augmentation
- •26.2.2 Surgical Procedure
- •26.2.3 Anteroposterior Reduction
- •26.2.4 Vertical Augmentation (Downgraft)
- •26.2.5 Vertical Reduction
- •26.3 Alloplastic Augmentations
- •26.3.1 Surgical Procedure
- •26.4 Genioplasty Complications
- •26.5 Mandibular Subapical Procedures
- •26.5.3 Possible Complications
- •26.6 Mandibular Body Surgery
- •26.7.1 Nonunion or Malunion
- •26.7.3 Infections
- •26.7.4 Periodontal Defects
- •26.7.5 Nerve Damage
- •26.8 Mandibular Ramus Surgery
- •26.9 Vertical Ramus Osteotomy
- •26.11.1 Early Relapse
- •26.11.2 Condylar Sag
- •26.11.4 Unfavorable Splits or Fractures
- •26.11.6 Periodontal Defects
- •26.11.8 Nerve Injury
- •26.11.9 Infections
- •26.11.10 Nonunion
- •26.11.11 Bleeding Problems
- •References
- •27.1 Occlusal Plane Alteration
- •27.1.1 History
- •27.2 Corrected Frankfort Horizontal Plane
- •27.3 High Occlusal Plane (HOP) Facial Type
- •27.3.6 MRI Evaluation
- •27.3.7 TMJ Disc Displacement
- •27.3.9 Reactive Arthritis
- •27.3.11 Other End-Stage TMJ Pathologies
- •27.6 Summary
- •References
- •28: Maxillomandibular Advancement
- •28.1.1 Symptoms
- •28.1.3.1 Noninvasive Treatments
- •28.1.3.2 Surgical Interventions
- •28.4.1 Preoperative Medical Assessment
- •28.5 Procedure
- •28.5.1.2 Plates Vs. Screws
- •28.7 Post-MMA Follow-Up Care
- •28.8 Conclusion
- •References
- •29.2.1 CASS Adoption Widespread
- •29.2.2 Overall CASS Accuracy
- •29.2.2.1 Soft-Tissue Prediction Simulators
- •29.2.3 Cost
- •29.4.1 Overall CASS Process
- •29.4.1.1 Step 1: Patient Referral
- •29.4.1.7 Step 7: Procedure
- •29.4.4 Case 3
- •29.5 Conclusion
- •References
- •30.1 Introduction
- •30.2 Preoperative Considerations
- •30.2.1 Surgical Facility
- •30.2.2 Medical Clearance
- •30.2.3 Anesthesia Considerations
- •30.3 Inpatient Postoperative Management
- •30.3.1 Immediate Postoperative Course
- •30.3.2 Acute Pain Management
- •30.3.5 DVT Prophylaxis
- •30.3.6 Nutrition
- •30.3.7 Antibiotics
- •30.4.1 Follow-Up Regimen
- •30.4.2 Postoperative Occlusal Guidance
- •30.5 Conclusion
- •References
- •31.1 Paradigm
- •31.2 Preoperative
- •31.3 Acute Post-surgical
- •31.4 Long-Term Post-surgical
- •References

Nasal Obstruction andSleep-Disordered Breathing
257
16
50. Craig TJ, Hanks CD, Fisher LH.How do topical nasal corticosteroids improve sleep and daytime somnolence in allergic
rhinitis? J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2005;116(6):1264–6. https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.jaci.2005.10.009.
51. How do topical nasal corticosteroids improve sleep and daytime
somnolence in allergic rhinitis?– PubMed– NCBI. https://www-
ncbi-nlm-nih-gov. proxy. library. vanderbilt. edu/
pubmed/16337455. Accessed 23 Sept 2019.
52. Golden S, Teets SJ, Lehman EB, et al. Effect of topical nasal
azelastine on the symptoms of rhinitis, sleep, and daytime somnolence in perennial allergic rhinitis. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol.
2000;85(1):53–7. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1081-1206(10)62434-9.
53. Santos CB, Hanks C, McCann J, Lehman EB, Pratt E, Craig
TJ.The role of montelukast on perennial allergic rhinitis and associated sleep disturbances and daytime somnolence. Allergy Asthma
Proc. 2008;29(2):140–5. https://doi.org/10.2500/aap.2008.29.3097.
54. Camacho M, Malu OO, Kram YA, etal. Nasal dilators (breathe
right strips and NoZovent) for snoring and OSA: a systematic
review and meta-analysis. Pulm Med. 2016;2016:4841310.
https://doi.org/10.1155/2016/4841310.
55. Schenkel EJ, Ciesla R, Shanga GM. Effects of nasal dilator
strips on subjective measures of sleep in subjects with chronic
nocturnal nasal congestion: a randomized, placebo-controlled
trial. Allergy Asthma Clin Immunol. 2018;14:34. https://doi.
org/10.1186/s13223-018-0258-5.
56. Ishii L, Roxbury C, Godoy A, Ishman S, Ishii M.Does nasal
surgery improve OSA in patients with nasal obstruction and
OSA? A Meta-analysis. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg.
2015;153(3):326–33. https://doi.org/10.1177/0194599815594374.
57. Li H-Y, Wang P-C, Chen Y-P, Lee L-A, Fang T-J, Lin
H-C.Critical appraisal and meta-analysis of nasal surgery for
obstructive sleep apnea. Am J Rhinol Allergy. 2011;25(1):45–9.
https://doi.org/10.2500/ajra.2011.25.3558.
58. Ertugay CK, Toros SZ, Karaca CT, etal. Is septoplasty effective
on habitual snoring in patients with nasal obstruction? Eur Arch
Otorhinolaryngol. 2015;272(7):1687–91. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s00405-014-3260-7.
59. Li H-Y, Lin Y, Chen N-H, Lee L-A, Fang T-J, Wang
P-C.Improvement in quality of life after nasal surgery alone for
patients with obstructive sleep apnea and nasal obstruction.
Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2008;134(4):429–33. https://
doi.org/10.1001/archotol.134.4.429.
60. Shuaib SW, Undavia S, Lin J, Johnson CM, Stupak HD.Can
functional septorhinoplasty independently treat obstructive
sleep apnea? Plast Reconstr Surg. 2015;135(6):1554–65. https://
doi.org/10.1097/PRS.0000000000001285.
61. Hisamatsu K, Kudo I, Makiyama K.The effect of compound nasal
surgery on obstructive sleep apnea syndrome. Am J Rhinol Allergy.
2015;29(6):e192–6. https://doi.org/10.2500/ajra.2015.29.4254.
62. Moxness MHS, Nordgård S.An observational cohort study of the
effects of septoplasty with or without inferior turbinate reduction
in patients with obstructive sleep apnea. BMC Ear Nose Throat
Disord. 2014;14:11. https://doi.org/10.1186/1472-6815-14-11.
63. Park CY, Hong JH, Lee JH, etal. Clinical effect of surgical correction for nasal pathology on the treatment of obstructive sleep
apnea syndrome. PLoS One. 2014;9(6):PMC4045850. https://
doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0098765.
64. Xiao Y, Han D, Zang H, Wang D.The effectiveness of nasal surgery on psychological symptoms in patients with obstructive sleep
apnea and nasal obstruction. Acta Otolaryngol. 2016;136(6):626–
32. https://doi.org/10.3109/00016489.2016.1143120.
65. Weaver TE, Grunstein RR. Adherence to continuous positive
airway pressure therapy. Proc Am Thorac Soc. 2008;5(2):173–8.
https://doi.org/10.1513/pats.200708-119MG.
66. Camacho M, Riaz M, Capasso R, etal. The effect of nasal surgery on continuous positive airway pressure device use and therapeutic treatment pressures: a systematic review and
meta-analysis. Sleep. 2015;38(2):279–86. https://doi.org/10.5665/
sleep.4414.
67. Kempe JS, BuSaba NY, Dobrowski JM, Westover MB, Bianchi
MT. A cost-effectiveness analysis of nasal surgery to increase
continuous positive airway pressure adherence in sleep apnea
patients with nasal obstruction. Laryngoscope. 2017;127(4):977–
83. https://doi.org/10.1002/lary.26257.
68. Kim ST, Choi JH, Jeon HG, Cha HE, Kim DY, Chung
Y-S.Polysomnographic effects of nasal surgery for snoring and
obstructive sleep apnea. Acta Otolaryngol. 2004;124(3):297–
300. https://doi.org/10.1080/00016480410016252.
69. Virkkula P, Bachour A, Hytönen M, etal. Snoring is not relieved
by nasal surgery despite improvement in nasal resistance. Chest.
2006;129(1):81–7. https://doi.org/10.1378/chest.129.1.81.
70. Choi JH, Kim EJ, Kim YS, etal. Effectiveness of nasal surgery
alone on sleep quality, architecture, position, and sleepdisordered breathing in obstructive sleep apnea syndrome with
nasal obstruction. Am J Rhinol Allergy. 2011;25(5):338–41.
https://doi.org/10.2500/ajra.2011.25.3654.
71. Suoğlu M, Ozmen OA, Kasapoglu F, etal. The efcacy of nasal
surgery in obstructive sleep apnea syndrome: a prospective clinical study. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2012;269(2):487–94.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00405-011-1682-z.
72. Virkkula P, Hytönen M, Bachour A, etal. Smoking and improvement after nasal surgery in snoring men. Am J Rhinol.
2007;21(2):169–73.
73. Friedman M, Tanyeri H, Lim JW, Landsberg R, Vaidyanathan
K, Caldarelli D.Effect of improved nasal breathing on obstructive sleep apnea. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2000;122(1):71–
4. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0194-5998(00)70147-1.
74. Li H-Y, Lee L-A, Wang P-C, Chen N-H, Lin Y, Fang T-J.Nasal
surgery for snoring in patients with obstructive sleep apnea.
Laryngoscope. 2008;118(2):354–9. https://doi.org/10.1097/
MLG.0b013e318158f73f.
75. Robison JG, Wilson C, Otteson TD, Chakravorty SS, Mehta
DK. Analysis of outcomes in treatment of obstructive sleep
apnea in infants. Laryngoscope. 2013;123(9):2306–14. https://
doi.org/10.1002/lary.23685.
76. Shatz A.Indications and outcomes of adenoidectomy in infancy.
Ann Otol Rhinol Laryngol. 2004;113(10):835–8. https://doi.
org/10.1177/000348940411301011.
77. Domany KA, Dana E, Tauman R, etal. Adenoidectomy for
obstructive sleep Apnea in children. J Clin Sleep Med.
2016;12(9):1285–91. https://doi.org/10.5664/jcsm.6134.
78. Caples SM, Rowley JA, Prinsell JR, etal. Surgical modications
of the upper airway for obstructive sleep apnea in adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sleep. 2010;33(10):1396–407.
https://doi.org/10.1093/sleep/33.10.1396.
79. healthpolicy. Position statement: nasal surgery and
OSAS.American Academy of Otolaryngology-Head and Neck
Surgery. https://www. entnet. org/content/nasal-surgery-and-osas.
Published March 20, 2014. Accessed 25 Sept 2019.
80. Reinberg A, Gervais P, Levi F, Smolensky M, Del Cerro L,
Ugolini C.Circadian and circannual rhythms of allergic rhinitis:
an epidemiologic study involving chronobiologic methods. J
Allergy Clin Immunol. 1988;81(1):51–62. https://doi.
org/10.1016/0091-6749(88)90220-5.

259
Palatal Surgery for OSA Patients
ChandraM.Cherukuri, NeerajKaplish, andJeffreyJ.Stanley
Contents
17.1 Introduction – 260
17.2 Presurgical Evaluation andAirway Assessment toIdentify
Site(s) ofCollapse – 260
17.2.1 Friedman Tongue Position andTonsillar Size – 260
17.2.2 Nasopharyngeal Endoscopy – 261
17.2.3 Cephalometrics – 261
17.3 Surgical Management ofOSA – 262
17.3.1 Uvulopalatopharyngoplasty (UPPP)±Tonsillectomy – 262
17.3.2 Modications ofUP3 – 264
17.3.3 Transpalatal Advancement Pharyngoplasty – 264
17.3.4 Palatal Stiening Procedures – 266
17
References – 267
© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2021
K. B. Kim et al. (eds.), Management of Obstructive Sleep Apnea, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-54146-0_17

260
Fat
C. M. Cherukuri etal.
17.1 Introduction
Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a common form of
sleep-disordered breathing. OSA usually results from
the combination of a narrowed upper airway and loss of
muscle tone during sleep, which leads to partial or complete cessation of airow. The upper airway includes the
nasal cavity, nasopharynx, oropharynx, hypopharynx,
and suparglottis, . Fig. 17.1. The oropharynx (retropalatal area) is considered the most common site of
obstruction in patients with OSA [1]. Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) increases the intraluminal
pressure to maintain the patency of the upper airway
and overcome the tendency of airway collapse in individuals with OSA. Current clinical practice guidelines
recommend positive airway pressure therapy for treatment of OSA in adult patients with impaired sleeprelated quality of life, excessive daytime sleepiness, or
other associated comorbidities [2]. Although PAP is the
primary treatment, many patients experience tolerating
PAP limiting the maximum benets from therapy [2, 3].
Because of this, patients may seek alternative treatment
modalities including surgical interventions to address
their upper airway obstruction.
Surgery can be a primary treatment option in a
select group of patients who have identiable anatomical problems (e.g., maxillomandibular abnormalities,
tonsillar hypertrophy), but is more commonly utilized
as a “salvage” treatment option for CPAP-intolerant
patients. Despite a variable cure rate, surgery has been
shown to routinely decrease OSA severity and increase
quality of life outcomes [4]. For an effective surgical
outcome, determining the site or sites of upper airway
obstruction is critical in selecting which surgical procedures may be most appropriate for each patient.
17.2 Presurgical Evaluation andAirway
Assessment toIdentify Site(s)
ofCollapse
Presurgical evaluation performed by a sleep medicine
physician should include a comprehensive sleep evaluation assessing for comorbid sleep disorders, structured
examination of the upper airway, and a diagnostic sleep
study. Overnight polysomnography (PSG) is the gold
standard for evaluation of OSA and is useful for determining the severity of sleep-disordered breathing as well
as identifying other comorbid conditions such as periodic limb movements, hypoventilation, and nocturnal
hypoxemia.
17.2.1 Friedman Tongue Position
andTonsillar Size
As part of a structured oral examination, Friedman
tongue position and tonsillar size grading can be used,
. Fig.17.2a, b [5]. The Friedman tongue position dif-
fers from the Mallampati classication, as the tongue is
observed in a natural, neutral position (i.e., no protrusion). Also, the Friedman position has been correlated
with surgical results for OSA, unlike the Mallampati
class, which has been correlated with the likelihood of
difcult intubation.
The Friedman clinical staging system is based on
clinical exam ndings including the Friedman tongue
position, tonsil size, and BMI and is divided into four
categories [6]. This staging system can help guide surgical interventions and predict the surgical success of
uvulopalatopharyngoplasty (UPPP). Nevertheless,
clinical examination is limited by the inability to directly
17
. Fig. 17.1 Upper airway anatomy.
A– nasopharynx; B– oropharynx;
C– hypopharynx; D– supraglottis
Soft palate
Tongue
Airway
Mandible
Spine
Subcutaneous
A
B
C
D

ab
Palatal Surgery forOSA Patients
261
17
. Fig. 17.2 a Friedman tongue/palate position grading. Grade 1:
Entire uvula+tonsils/pillars visible. Grade 2: Base of uvula but tonsils/pillars not visible. Grade 3: Only soft and hard palate visible.
Grade 4: Only hard palate visible. b Friedman Tonsil Size grading
visualize the nasopharynx and hypopharynx to localize
all potential sites of upper airway obstruction. Further
diagnostic evaluation with nasopharyngeal endoscopy
and cephalometric analysis can aid in further assessment of the upper airway.
[10]. Grade 1: Tonsils hidden within pillars. Grade 2: Tonsils extend
to the pillars. Grade 3; Extend past the pillars (3/4th way to midline).
Grade 4: Extend to the midline (“kissing tonsils”)
a valid assessment of the upper airway, with moderate
to substantial test–retest reliability and moderate-tosubstantial inter-rater reliability [6, 7]. Classication for
obstruction during DISE is dened with regard to the
degree of obstruction and pattern of collapse (i.e., anterior–posterior, lateral, and concentric) [6].
A recent meta-analysis of obstructive sites in OSA
17.2.2 Nasopharyngeal Endoscopy
patients based on a DISE examination reported that
patients were likely to have multilevel obstruction rather
Flexible nasopharyngeal endoscopy aids in identifying
potential sites of collapse of the upper airway and can
be performed while awake or in a drug-induced sleeplike state. Endoscopic examination allows visualizing
the entire nasal cavity and nasopharynx (assessing septal deviation, turbinate hypertrophy, nasal polyps, etc.),
hypopharynx (assessing for the lateral pharyngeal walls,
base of the tongue, and lingual tonsils), along with assess-
than single-site obstruction. The majority of patients
were obstructed at the soft palate (84%), followed by the
base of the tongue (52%) [7]. These results emphasize
the importance of performing nasopharyngeal endoscopy for evaluation of patients with OSA due to the
high likelihood of multilevel upper airway obstruction
and the inability to appropriately assess the entire length
of the upper airway on clinical exam alone.
ment of the supraglottis for potential epiglottic collapse.
During awake endoscopy, Mueller’s maneuver is
performed with a closed mouth and an obstructed nose
17.2.3 Cephalometrics
during maximal inspiration. This maneuver increases
the intraluminal negative pressure to mimic sleeprelated dynamic upper airway collapse. Drug-induced
sleep endoscopy (DISE) is performed under mild sedation (using propofol or midazolam), and has the ability to mimic the dynamics of upper airway collapse
during a sleep-like state. DISE has been shown to be
Cephalometric analysis using plain x-rays or Cone Beam
Computed Tomography (CBCT) is an additional tool to
assess upper airway dimensions and aid in the surgical
evaluation of OSA patients. CBCT data include a variety
of objective airway measurements that help identify potential sites of obstruction in patients with OSA, . Fig.17.3.

262
C. M. Cherukuri etal.
S
Surgeries for OSA can be broadly divided into two
categories:
1. Single level– usually Palate.
2. Multilevel– usually Palate+Hypopharynx.
N
In this chapter, we will primarily focus on single-level
surgeries on the palate.
17
PNS
ANS
P
Go
PAS
MP
H
Gn
Cephalometric Measures Normal values
SNA 82°+3°
SNB 79°+3°
H-MP 15 mm +3 mm
PAS 11 mm +1 mm
PNS-P 37 mm +3 mm
. Fig. 17.3 Cephalometric tracing and analysis with normal ceph-
alometric values. SNA sella-nasion-infraspinale, SNB sella-nasionsupramentale, H-MP hyoid-mandibular plane, PAS posterior airway
space, PNS-P length of soft palate
A
B
Studies have shown that a posterior airway space
(PAS) <8 mm is predictive of tongue base collapse
[8]. A recent study evaluating the correlation between
Friedman Tongue Position (FTP) and airway cephalometric measures in OSA patients identied that the
posterior airway space (PAS) and minimal retroglossal
cross- sectional area had an inverse relationship with
FTP [9].
17.3 Surgical Management ofOSA
Current guidelines recommend that patients who are
deemed to be surgical candidates should be counseled
regarding success rates and complications of appropriate surgical techniques [10]. Based on localization of
upper airway obstruction, a variety of surgical procedures have been described, primarily focusing on the
palate in order to increase the physical size of the upper
airway.
17.3.1 Uvulopalatopharyngoplasty
(UPPP)±Tonsillectomy
Although a multitude of surgical treatment modalities
exist, the most commonly performed technique remains
the uvulopalatopharyngoplasty (UPPP). In theory,
UPPP provides improved patency of the airway by
addressing the obstruction at the retropalatal area.
Surgical Technique
z
Performed under general anesthesia, this procedure
involves resection of the redundant soft palatal tissue
and anterior tonsillar pillar, back cuts in the posterior
tonsillar pillars, and re-approximation of the mucosal
edges. If present, tonsillectomy is performed at the same
surgical setting (. Fig.17.4).
17.3.1.1 Success Rate of UPPP
Historically, the denition of “success” following surgical intervention for OSA in the ENT literature is a
reduction in apnea hypopnea index (AHI) of >50% and
an AHI of <20 (the previous denition of mild OSA
prior to the introduction of the new American Academy
of Sleep Medicine severity scale adopted in 1999). The
criteria for cure is dened as an AHI <5 following treatment [9]. In order to avoid controversy regarding denitions, a substantial “improvement” in the underlying
OSA severity is probably a better description than true
“success” for postoperative results.
Reported “success” rates of UPPP vary considerably. The overall “success” rate for UPPP in unselected
patients is approximately 40% [10] with an overall
reduction in AHI of 33% based on meta-analysis data.
A retrospective analysis using a Friedman clinical staging system for patients with OSA appears to be a valuable predictor of UPPP success. Utilizing this staging
system, the UPPP success rate was 80% for stage I
patients, 37% for stage II patients, and 8% for stage III
patients, .
patients with Friedman stage I and II and combined
ndings of awake nasopharyngeal endoscopy with
Mueller’s maneuver in patient selection for UPPP.This
subset of highly selected patients who were found to
have retropalatal obstruction only had a success rate
of 95% [12]. These reports of improved surgical success
Table17.1 [11]. Another study selected OSA

Palatal Surgery forOSA Patients
263
17
with UPPP highlight the importance of accurately identifying the site or sites of obstruction in patient selection.
17.3.1.2 Limitations of UPPP
There are several limitations of UPPP surgery:
1. The principal improvement is an increase in the
anteroposterior retropalatal airway.
. Table 17.1 Friedman clinical staging system for
sleep-disordered breathing and UPPP “success” rates
Stage I Stage II Stage III
Friedman palate
position
Tonsil size 3–4 0–2 3–4 0–2 A ny
BMI <40 <40 <40 <40 >40
UPPP success
a
rate
a
AHI reduction 50% and AHI <20
1–2 1–2 3–4 3–4 Any
80% 37% 8%
2. UPPP does NOT improve lateral dimensions of the
upper airway.
3. UPPP does NOT address potential retroglossal
collapse.
4. UPPP does NOT address the decrease in the upper
airway dilator muscle tone observed during sleep.
17.3.1.3 Impact of UPPP
Quality of Life Indices:
z
Isolated UPPP has been shown to improve subjective
outcomes such as excessive daytime sleepiness (assessed
by Epworth sleepiness scale) and disease-specic quality
of life measures (assessed by the validated Functional
Outcomes of Sleep Questionnaire). The Epworth
Sleepiness Scale has been shown to normalize in 75% of
patients at 6months following UPPP and the Functional
Outcomes Sleep Questionnaire (FOSQ) normalized at
3months postoperatively [13, 14].
Biomarkers:
z
A signicant reduction in serum levels of high- sensitivity
C-reactive protein have been observed 6months following UPPP in OSA patients without a pre-existing diagnosis of cardiovascular disease [15].
. Fig. 17.4 Uvulopalatopharyngoplasty

17
264
C. M. Cherukuri etal.
Survival:
z
A retrospective cohort study among veterans suggests
that UPPP provides a 30% greater long-term survival
than CPAP, after adjusting for age, gender, race, date of
treatment, and comorbidity [16]. There was also a signicant decrease in reported habitual sleepiness while
driving and decreased risk of motor vehicle accidents
following UPPP [17].
17.3.1.4 Complications of UPPP
The anatomic and physiologic abnormalities associated
with OSA increase the risk of perioperative complication in OSA patients undergoing surgery.
Early Complications
z
In a large cohort of UPPP patients, the reported incidences of serious nonfatal complications and 30-day
mortality following UPPP are 1.5% and 0.2%, respectively [18]. Postoperative edema and respiratory depression increase the risk of reintubation or emergent
tracheotomy within the rst few hours following surgery. Most patients are able to tolerate liquids on the
rst postoperative day, although with signicant pain.
As with any procedure inclusive of tonsillectomy, the
risk of postoperative bleeding requiring additional surgical intervention is 1–4%.
Late Complications
z
Velopharyngeal insufciency is a rare, but serious complication of UPPP, occurring in <1% of patients. This
complication can usually be prevented by avoidance of
aggressive resection of the underlying soft palatal musculature. A globus sensation in the oropharyngeal area is
reported by nearly half of the patients following UPPP
and is frequently described as a foreign body sensation
or as a sense of excessive mucous accumulation at the
free edge of the soft palate. Nasopharyngeal stenosis is
an extremely rare late complication following UPPP, but
can result in worsening of nasal airow in patients who
develop excessive scarring following surgery.
17.3.2 Modications ofUP3
Several modications of UPPP have been introduced
with the intent of improving success rates and reducing the rate of postoperative complications. The most
common of these surgeries, including uvulopalatoap,
z- palatoplasty, and expansion sphincter pharyngoplasty, are described in detail below.
17.3.2.1 Uvulopalatoap
This surgery is performed under general anesthesia.
After tonsillectomy is done, the mucosa overlying the
uvula and soft palate is denuded. The muscular tip of
the exposed uvula is then retracted superiorly toward
the hard–soft palate junction [19]. The goal of this modication of UPPP is to reduce the likelihood of complications related to scar contracture and the development
of nasopharyngeal stenosis. An additional benet of
this modication is that it is potentially reversible since
no muscular tissue is resected (see . Fig.17.5).
17.3.2.2 Z-Palatopharyngoplasty
This modication of UPPP was designed to improve surgical success rates in patients who had undergone previous tonsillectomy [20]. The procedure involves denuding
the mucosa of the uvula and soft palate, splitting the
soft palate, and completing a subsequent anterolateral
advancement, without resection of muscular tissue (see
. Fig. 17.6). This results in contracture tension lines
resulting in further widening of the airway, particularly
in the lateral dimension, which is otherwise difcult to
achieve with traditional UPPP in patients who have
undergone previous tonsillectomy. The result is higher
success rates for Friedman stage II patients. One potential downside to this procedure is that there is a higher
incidence of temporary velopharyngeal insufciency [21].
17.3.2.3 Expansion Sphincter Pharyngoplasty
This modication of UPPP was developed for a selected
subset of OSA patients with small tonsils, Friedman stage
II or III, and lateral pharyngeal wall collapse noted on
endoscopic examination. The procedure involves transection of the inferior aspect of the palatopharygeus muscle
with intact attachment to the superior constrictor muscles, rotation superolaterally, and subsequent submucosal
attachment to the soft palate anteriorly (see . Fig.17.7).
Once complete, uvulectomy is performed [22]. The goal
of this procedure is a reduction in lateral pharyngeal wall
collapse. This surgery has better success rates than traditional UPPP, but there may be a slightly increased incidence of postoperative dysphagia (see . Table17.2).
17.3.3 Transpalatal Advancement
Pharyngoplasty
This procedure is typically used as a treatment for
patients with persistent OSA and a persistently narrowed retropalatal airway. Surgery involves elevation of
the mucosa off the hard palate and subsequent resection
of a portion of the hard palate. The soft palate is then
advanced anteriorly following tensor tendonolysis (see
. Fig. 17.8). The tensor tendons are then re-approxi-
mated to soft tissue near the hammulus and the anterior and posterior hard palatal segments are sutured
together [23]. The benet of this surgical technique is
that it increases both the anteroposterior and the lateral
dimensions of the retropalatal airway.

Palatal Surgery forOSA Patients
Uvulopalatal Flap (UPF)
265
17
. Fig. 17.5 Uvulopalatal ap procedure
Z-PALATOPLASTY
. Fig. 17.6 Z-palatoplasty

266
C. M. Cherukuri etal.
Expansion sphincter
pharyngoploasty
17
. Fig. 17.7 Expansion sphincter pharyngoplasty
. Table 17.2 Expansion sphincter pharyngoplasty (ESP)
vs. uvulopalatopharyngoplasty (UPPP)
ESP UPPP
Preop AHI 44.2 38.1
Postop AHI 12 19.6
Success rate
a
AHI reduction 50% and AHI <20
a
82.6% 68.1%
17.3.4 Palatal Stiening Procedures
Palatal stiffening procedures have been developed to
be a less invasive means of improving retropalatal collapse in patients with OSA.These procedures include
radiofrequency volumetric tissue reduction and cauteryassisted palatal stiffening operation.
17.3.4.1 Radiofrequency Volumetric Tissue
Reduction (RFTA)
Radiofrequency volumetric tissue reduction is a minimally invasive multistep palatal procedure that involves
delivery of a high-frequency alternating current into
the palate with resultant protein coagulation and tissue
necrosis. The ultimate goal is a reduction in soft palatal
tissue volume. The efcacy of RFTA in management
of mild OSA (dened as AHI 5–15) is comparable to
UPP. However, because of less morbidity and fewer
treatment-related complications, it is often thought of
as a favorable surgical alternative to UPPP in patients
with mild OSA [24]. In addition, this procedure can be
performed under local anesthesia, avoiding the necessity
of general anesthesia with its inherent risks.
17.3.4.2 Cautery-Assisted Palatal Stiening
Operation
This procedure is also less invasive than UPPP. It
involves removal of a rectangular area (7mm × 5cm)
of soft palatal mucosa, uvulectomy, and vertical cuts

ab
Palatal Surgery forOSA Patients
267
17
. Fig. 17.8 Transpalatal advancement pharyngoplasty
into the soft palate on either side of the uvula (see
. Fig.17.9). Elevation of the soft palate results from
brosis and retraction at the site of mucosal resection.
Similar to RFTA, this procedure can also be performed
under local anesthesia.
References
. Fig. 17.9 Cautery-assisted palatal stiffening procedure
1. Lin S-W, Chen N-H, Li H-Y, etal. A comparison of the longterm outcome and effects of surgery or continuous positive airway pressure on patients with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome.
Laryngoscope. 2006;116:1012–6.
2. Schwab RJ, Gefter WB, Hoffman EA, Gupta KB, Pack
AI.Dynamic upper airway imaging during awake respiration in
normal subjects and patients with sleep disordered breathing.
Am Rev Respir Dis. 1993;148:1385.
3. Rodriguez-Bruno K, Goldberg AN, McCulloch KEJ.Test retest
reliability of drug-induced endoscopy. Otolaryngol Head Neck
Surg. 2009;140:646–51.
4. Kezirian EJ, White DP, Malhotra A, McCulloch CE, Goldberg
AN.Interrater reliability of drug-induced sleep endoscopy. Arch
Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2010;136:393–7.
5. Kezirian EJ, Hohenhorst W, de Vries N. Drug-induced sleep
endoscopy: the VOTE classication. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2011;268:1233.
6. Lee EJ, Cho JH.Meta-analysis of obstruction site observed with
drug-induced sleep endoscopy in patients with obstructive sleep
apnea. Laryngoscope. 2019;129:1235.
7. Patil SP, Ayappa IA, Caples SM, Kimoff RJ, Patel SR, Harrod CG.Treatment of adult obstructive sleep Apnea with positive airway pressure: an American Academy of Sleep Medicine
Соседние файлы в папке Библиотека им академика М.И. Перельмана
