How are you taking part in this consultation?

You will not be able to change how you comment later.

You must be signed in to answer questions

    The content on this page is not current guidance and is only for the purposes of the consultation process.

    Interventional procedure overview of daytime intraoral neuromuscular electrical tongue stimulation using a removable device for obstructive sleep apnoea

    Closed for comments This consultation ended on at   Request commenting lead permission

    Other relevant studies

    Other potentially relevant studies to the IP overview that were not included in the main evidence summary (tables 2 and 3) are listed in table 5.

    Table 5 additional studies identified

    Article

    Number of patients and follow up

    Direction of conclusions

    Reason study was not included in main evidence summary

    Moffa A, Giorgi L, Carnuccio L et al. (2022) New non-invasive electrical stimulation devices for treatment of snoring and obstructive sleep apnoea: a systematic review. Sleep and Breathing

    Systematic review

    n=4 studies

    Intraoral non-invasive electrical stimulation devices can be considered a valid option to current therapies for snoring. Further studies are needed to support these interesting new devices for treatment of OSA.

    Of the 4 studies, 3 relevant papers are included in the key evidence. No meta-analysis was carried out.

    Nokes B, Schmickl CN, Brena R et al. (2022) The impact of daytime transoral neuromuscular stimulation on upper airway physiology – A mechanistic clinical investigation. Physiological Reports

    Clinical trial

    n=20 patients with simple snoring and mild OSA

    Transoral neurostimulation did not result in changes in genioglossal activity or upper airway collapse, but other beneficial effects were noted suggesting a need for additional mechanistic investigation.

    This was a mechanistic clinical investigation, assessing the physiological effects of transoral neurostimulation on genioglossus activity and markers of inspiratory flow limitation. Also, the number of patients with mild OSA was unclear and the relevant outcomes were not reported separately.