Objectives/HypothesisUpper Airway Stimulation (UAS) is an FDA approved treatment option for patients with moderate‐to‐severe obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) who could not adhere to continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). Previous studies have shown UAS reduced apnea‐hypopnea index (AHI) in controlled clinical trials and from academic institutions. We report patient outcomes and therapy adherence of UAS in a non‐academic hospital and clinic setting.Study DesignCase series of consecutive patients.MethodsConsecutive implants completed at a community hospital between January 2015 to Feb 2017 are included in this report. All patients underwent baseline polysomnography (PSG) recording and drug‐induced sleep endoscopy (DISE) prior to the implant. All patients had returned for standard post‐implantation titration PSG at a community sleep clinic to validate and adjust the stimulation setting for optimal response. Results were in mean ± SD, and pre‐ and post‐implant data were compared using a paired student t‐test.ResultsA total 22 patients undergoing UAS implant were overweight (BMI of 28.9 ± 5.0 kg/m2) and middle aged (63.2 ± 11.1 years), and had severe OSA (AHI of 35.9 ± 19.1). The AHI from the entire night of the titration study was 16.0 ± 10.4 (P < .01, compared with baseline), and the treatment AHI from the sleep period when the optimal setting was programmed was 1.2 ± 1.1 (P < .001, compared with baseline), and 90% patients had titrated AHI less than 5. The lowest SpO2 increased from 81% ± 8% at baseline to 91% ± 3% at the titrated setting (P = .001). After an average follow up of 95 ± 28.5 days, the therapy use per night was 7.0 ± 1.9 hours per night. The average postoperative ESS was 6.7 ± 5.3 of 18 patients, a reduction from the baseline of 10.9 ± 4.8. A total of 13 of 18 patients with postoperative ESS < 10, a measure indicated normalization of daytime sleepiness.ConclusionPatients who elected to receive UAS implant surgery at a non‐academic hospital and followed at a sleep clinic showed significant reduction in OSA severity with strong adherence to treatment. These results supported that UAS as a valid treatment option for OSA can be successfully implemented in the non‐academic hospital and clinic settings.Level of Evidence4

No abstract