Pediatric Down Syndrome Upper Airway Stimulation: Patient Selection and Post-Implantation Optimization.

OBJECTIVE: The Food and Drug Administration recently approved upper airway stimulation (UAS) for children with Down Syndrome and persistent obstructive sleep apnea who meet certain inclusion and exclusion criteria. Although there is a robust experience with this therapy in the adult population, established protocols used in adults are not directly transferrable to a complex pediatric population. This review aims to combine the protocols from several institutions for patient selection and postimplantation optimization, including a protocol for Drug-Induced Sleep Endoscopy in children with Down Syndrome, preactivation threshold measurements, device titration, and follow-up sleep studies. STUDY DESIGN: Expert panel development of best Practice algorithm. SETTING: Multi-institutional investigator review. METHODS: An expert panel was assembled of pediatric otolaryngologists with extensive experience in hypoglossal nerve stimulation in children with Down Syndrome. Thirty statements were created during an initial drafting session. A modified Delphi method was used assess consensus among the panel. RESULTS: After 2 rounds of Delphi surveys, 29 statements met criteria for consensus. One statement did not meet consensus. The statements were grouped into several categories to facilitate presentation. CONCLUSIONS: A standardized approach to UAS for children with Down Syndrome must take into account the unique challenges inherent to treating a complex pediatric population with a high rate of sensory processing disorders. This expert panel has met consensus on several statements that will guide clinicians as this novel therapy is adopted.

Challenges and adverse events in pediatric hypoglossal nerve stimulation.

INTRODUCTION: Hypoglossal nerve stimulation was recently FDA approved for use in children with Down Syndrome and persistent obstructive sleep apnea. Although there is a robust experience in hypoglossal nerve stimulation in adults, we observed several challenges that are unique to providing this therapy to a complex pediatric population with a high rate of sensory processing disorders. We sought to review the adverse events and challenges to inform clinicians as hypoglossal nerve stimulation becomes a more accessible option for this complex population. METHODS: Retrospective case series of children with Down Syndrome and persistent OSA who underwent hypoglossal nerve stimulation. Inclusion and exclusion criteria included Down Syndrome, age 10-22 years, persistent severe OSA after adenotonsillectomy (AHI>10 with <25 % central or mixed events), inability to tolerate positive airway pressure, and absence of concentric palatal collapse on sleep endoscopy. Patients were identified and their charts were reviewed. Adverse events and their subsequent management were recorded. The major outcome variable was the total number of adverse events. RESULTS: A total of 53 patients underwent implantation of a hypoglossal nerve stimulator; 35 (66 %) patients were male and the average age at implantation was 15.1 years (standard deviation 3.0y). A total of 30 adverse events were noted, including 17 nonserious and 13 serious. The most common nonserious complications included temporary tongue discomfort, rash at the surgical site, and cellulitis. Serious complications included readmission (for cellulitis, pain, and device extrusion), reoperation (most commonly for battery depletion) and pressure ulcer formation. CONCLUSION: Hypoglossal nerve stimulation provides a much-needed therapy for children with DS and persistent OSA after adenotonsillectomy. Although there is a robust experience in providing this treatment to adults, many considerations must be made when adapting this technology to a pediatric population with a high rate of sensory processing disorders.