4.7 Article

Effects of treatment by laser-assisted uvuloplasty on steep energy expenditure in obstructive sleep apnea patients

Journal

METABOLISM-CLINICAL AND EXPERIMENTAL
Volume 51, Issue 5, Pages 622-627

Publisher

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1053/meta.2002.31969

Keywords

-

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of successful laser-assisted uvulopalatoplasty (LAUP) on sleep energy expenditure (EE) in obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) patients. Fifteen healthy subjects (group 1) and 25 patients with moderately severe or severe OSAS (group 11) proven by overnight sleep study and who wanted LAUP were enrolled, During the night of the sleep studies, EE was measured with a metabolic cart (indirect calorimetry with canopy), including basal metabolic rate (BMR), mean sleep EE, lowest sleep EE, ratios of mean sleep EE/BMR, and lowest sleep EE/BMR, For the OSAS patients, a second sleep study with EE measurement was performed 3 months after LAUP. Based on this assessment of their sleep architecture, they were divided into 2 groups: responders (group IIa) and nonresponders (group IIb). The mean sleep EE, the ratio of mean sleep EE/BMR and lowest EE/BMR were significantly higher in group 11 than group I. After LAUP in group 11, 6 patients were found to be responders (group IIa) and 19 patients were nonresponders (group IIb). Group IIa had decreased mean sleep EE, ratios of mean sleep EE/BMR, and lowest sleeping EE/BMR after LAUP than before LAUP compared with no significant changes in group IIb after LAUP. In conclusion, there is increased sleep EE in moderately severe OSAS patients when compared with normal controls. LAUP, when effective in reversing the sleep abnormalities, also normalizes the sleep EE. If it does not adequately treat the OSAS, however, the sleep EE remains abnormal. Copyright 2002, Elsevier Science (USA). All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available