Transcutaneous electrical stimulation in obstructive sleep apnoea: current developments and concepts of the TESLA-home programme.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) is a highly prevalent condition affecting about 1 billion people worldwide. The first line therapy for most patients with OSA is continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy. However, there are significant limitations with long-term adherence to CPAP therapy, which may be as low as 30-60%. RECENT FINDING: Electrical stimulation of the hypoglossal nerve has been studied in recent years. It achieves upper airway patency by causing a contraction of the genioglossus muscle, the strongest dilator of the upper airway, and by maintaining its neuromuscular tone in the asleep patient with OSA. Electrical stimulation can be delivered invasively, hypoglossal nerve stimulation (HNS), and noninvasively, transcutaneous electrical stimulation in OSA (TESLA). However, randomised controlled trials, the STAR and the TESLA trial, have provided promising results on efficacy and safety of the methods. SUMMARY: Patient and public involvement underlines the interest in TESLA and HNS and highlights the need to provide non-CPAP therapeutic options to those who may find it difficult to cope with first line therapies. The relatively low costs and the favourable safety profile of the TESLA approach provide the chance to offer this treatment to patients with OSA following further development of the evidence.

Electrical stimulation as a therapeutic approach in obstructive sleep apnea - a meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Electrical stimulation of the upper airway dilator muscles is an emerging treatment for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Invasive hypoglossal nerve stimulation (HNS) has been accepted as treatment alternative to continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) for selected patients, while transcutaneous electrical stimulation (TES) of the upper airway is being investigated as non-invasive alternative. METHODS: A meta-analysis (CRD42017074674) on the effects of both HNS and TES on the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) and the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) in OSA was conducted including published evidence up to May 2018. Random-effects models were used. Heterogeneity and between-study variance were assessed by I2 and τ2, respectively. RESULTS: Of 41 identified clinical trials, 20 interventional trials (n = 895) could be pooled in a meta-analysis (15 HNS [n = 808], 5 TES [n = 87]). Middle-aged (mean ± SD 56.9 ± 5.5 years) and overweight (body mass index 29.1 ± 1.5 kg/m2) patients with severe OSA (AHI 37.5 ± 7.0/h) were followed-up for 6.9 ± 4.0 months (HNS) and 0.2 ± 0.4 months (TES), respectively. The AHI improved by - 24.9 h-1 [95%CI - 28.5, - 21.2] in HNS (χ2 79%, I2 82%) and by - 16.5 h-1 [95%CI - 25.1, - 7.8] in TES (χ2 7%, I2 43%; both p < 0.001). The ESS was reduced by - 5.0 (95%CI - 5.9, - 4.1) (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Both invasive and transcutaneous electrical stimulation reduce OSA severity by a clinically relevant margin. HNS results in a clinically relevant improvement of symptoms. While HNS represents an invasive treatment for selected patients with moderate to severe OSA, TES should be further investigated as potential non-invasive approach for OSA.

NREM parasomnias: a treatment approach based upon a retrospective case series of 512 patients.

BACKGROUND: Non-REM parasomnias are not uncommon conditions in the general population. Current treatment options are based on small case series and reports. In this study, we aimed to present the clinical experience from a large cohort of patients. PATIENTS: Five hundred and twelve patients with Non-REM parasomnia or parasomnia overlap disorder (POD), who had undergone a video polysomnography and were exposed to treatment, were retrospectively identified. Treatment outcome was assessed based on patients' reports, and treatment approach on a locally accepted hierarchy of interventions. RESULTS: Forty percent of patients were diagnosed with sleepwalking, 23.8% with mixed-phenotype and 10% with POD. Ultimately, 97.2% reported adequate control of their symptoms. Moreover, 60.1% were treated with pharmacotherapy and 32.0% without, consistent across all phenotypes (p = 0.09). Benzodiazepines were the most common drugs prescribed (47.1%, p < 0.05). In the end, 37.7% of our patients were receiving a benzodiazepine as part of their successful treatment, 11.7% an antidepressant, 9.2% a z-drug, and 10.7% melatonin. Finally, 13.2%, 12.1%, and 5.8% of our patients reported good control of their symptoms with sleep hygiene, management of sleep-disordered breathing, and psychological interventions (cognitive behavioral therapy [CBT] or mindfulness-based stress reduction [MBSR]), as monotherapy, respectively. CONCLUSION: The treatment approach to effective treatment of the patients with Non-REM parasomnias or POD offering first sleep hygiene advice, next treatment of concurrent sleep disorders and management of other priming factors like stress and anxiety, and lastly pharmacotherapy for Non-REM parasomnia is supported by our results. Non pharmacological interventions were effective in one third of our patients, and CBT/MBSR and melatonin appeared promising new treatments.

Electrical stimulation for the treatment of obstructive sleep apnoea: a review of the evidence.

INTRODUCTION: Obstructive sleep apnoea is an increasingly prevalent clinical condition with significant impact on individuals and public health. Continuous positive airway pressure therapy is the standard treatment, but adherence is limited and alternative treatments are needed. In this context, non-invasive and invasive methods for the electrical stimulation of upper airway dilator muscles have been demonstrated to be effective in selected patients. Areas covered: This review will cover investigations on the clinical effects, safety, and tolerability of non-invasive and invasive electrical stimulation of the upper airway for the management of obstructive sleep apnoea. Following a search of the relevant literature published on PubMed this review is focused mainly on data obtained from randomized clinical trials and clinical studies. Expert commentary: The available evidence provides a rationale to consider upper airway electrical stimulation as treatment for selected patients with obstructive sleep apnoea, who have poor adherence or experience difficulties with continuous positive airway pressure therapy. Non-invasive stimulation using transcutaneous electrodes and implantable hypoglossal nerve stimulator technologies may provide an alternative to continuous positive airway pressure for the treatment of obstructive sleep apnoea via restoration of neuromuscular tone and improved upper airway patency.

Randomised sham-controlled trial of transcutaneous electrical stimulation in obstructive sleep apnoea.

INTRODUCTION: Obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) is characterised by a loss of neuromuscular tone of the upper airway dilator muscles while asleep. This study investigated the effectiveness of transcutaneous electrical stimulation in patients with OSA. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a randomised, sham-controlled crossover trial using transcutaneous electrical stimulation of the upper airway dilator muscles in patients with confirmed OSA. Patients were randomly assigned to one night of sham stimulation and one night of active treatment. The primary outcome was the 4% oxygen desaturation index, responders were defined as patients with a reduction >25% in the oxygen desaturation index when compared with sham stimulation and/or with an index <5/hour in the active treatment night. RESULTS: In 36 patients (age mean 50.8 (SD 11.2) years, male/female 30/6, body mass index median 29.6 (IQR 26.9-34.9) kg/m(2), Epworth Sleepiness Scale 10.5 (4.6) points, oxygen desaturation index median 25.7 (16.0-49.1)/hour, apnoea-hypopnoea index median 28.1 (19.0-57.0)/hour) the primary outcome measure improved when comparing sham stimulation (median 26.9 (17.5-39.5)/hour) with active treatment (median 19.5 (11.6-40.0)/hour; p=0.026), a modest reduction of the mean by 4.1 (95% CI -0.6 to 8.9)/hour. Secondary outcome parameters of patients' perception indicated that stimulation was well tolerated. Responders (47.2%) were predominantly from the mild-to-moderate OSA category. In this subgroup, the oxygen desaturation index was reduced by 10.0 (95% CI 3.9 to 16.0)/hour (p<0.001) and the apnoea-hypopnoea index was reduced by 9.1 (95% CI 2.0 to 16.2)/hour (p=0.004). CONCLUSION: Transcutaneous electrical stimulation of the pharyngeal dilators during a single night in patients with OSA improves upper airway obstruction and is well tolerated. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01661712.

Continuous transcutaneous submental electrical stimulation in obstructive sleep apnea: a feasibility study.

BACKGROUND: The therapeutic value of transcutaneous electrical stimulation of the genioglossus muscle in patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) to reduce sleep-disordered breathing is unclear. METHODS: Contraction of the genioglossus muscles during transcutaneous stimulation was investigated using ultrasonography in 11 healthy subjects (seven men, mean [SD] age 30 [6] years; BMI, 24.2 [3.5] kg/m(2)). Esophageal and gastric pressures were measured with balloon catheters, and transesophageal diaphragm electromyogram (EMGdi) was recorded during polysomnography in 11 patients with OSA (eight men, aged 51 [16] years; BMI, 42.0 [9.7] kg/m(2)) while transcutaneous electrical stimulation of the genioglossus was applied in non-rapid eye movement sleep (stage N2). RESULTS: Ultrasonography measurements showed a significant increase in tongue diameter during stimulation (sagittal: 10.0% [2.8%]; coronal: 9.4 % [3.7%]). The measurements were reproducible and repeatable. In patients with OSA, snoring decreased during stimulation (P < .001) and oxygenation improved (P = .001); the respiratory disturbance index (RDI) fell from 28.1 (26.3) to 10.2 (10.2) events per hour during stimulation (P = .002), returning to 26.6 (26.0) events per hour after stimulation was stopped. Transdiaphragmatic pressure swing decreased from 24.1 (13.5) cm H(2)O to 19.7 (7.1) cm H(2)O (P = .022), increasing to 24.2 (10.8) cm H(2)O afterward, and EMGdi fell from 23.8% max (12.6% max) to 15.7% max (6.4% max) (P < .001), rising to 22.6% max (10.4% max) post stimulation. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous transcutaneous electrical stimulation of the genioglossus contracts the genioglossus muscle and reduces ventilatory load and neural respiratory drive in patients with OSA.