Valerie A Picavet1,2,3, Marc Dellian4, Eckard Gehrking4, Alexander Sauter4, Katrin Hasselbacher5. 1. ENT, Praxis für Ästhetik/HNO, Ludwigstrasse 7, Augsburg, Bavaria, Germany. valerie.picavet@gmail.com. 2. ENT, MVZ Moser Gehrking Sauter und Partner, Augsburg, Bavaria, Germany. valerie.picavet@gmail.com. 3. ENT Praxis Hasselbacher Picavet & Partner, Donauwörth, Bavaria, Germany. valerie.picavet@gmail.com. 4. ENT, MVZ Moser Gehrking Sauter und Partner, Augsburg, Bavaria, Germany. 5. ENT Praxis Hasselbacher Picavet & Partner, Donauwörth, Bavaria, Germany.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess safety and efficacy of a non-invasive 2940 nm Er:YAG treatment with SMOOTH mode in reducing snoring in adult patients and to compare its efficacy and safety to sham treatment in a randomized controlled trial setting. METHODS: 40 primary snoring patients (≥ 18 year, AHI < 15e/h, BMI ≤ 30) were randomized to receive either 3 sessions NightLase or sham laser treatment. The main outcome measures were Snore Outcomes Survey (SOS), the Spouse/Bed Partner Survey (SBPS), a visual analogue snoring scale (bed partner) and a visual analogue pain scale. RESULTS: NightLase was well tolerated, no local anaesthesia was required (mean VAS pain score in NightLase group = 3.0 ± 1.7). No complications occurred. SOS, SBPS and VAS snoring scores improved in the NightLase group (33.7 ± 14.1 to 56.2 ± 16.1) (35.0 ± 17.1 to 61.5 ± 16.4) and (7.9 ± 2.0 to 4.7 ± 2.8) while no changing in the sham group (32.2 ± 14.5 vs 32.1 ± 13.0) (36.7 ± 12.1 vs 34.7 ± 12.7) (8.1 ± 1.7 vs 8.0 ± 1.6), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: NightLase is a safe, minimal invasive treatment that significantly reduced snoring compared to sham treatment.
OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to assess safety and efficacy of a non-invasive 2940 nm Er:YAG treatment with SMOOTH mode in reducing snoring in adult patients and to compare its efficacy and safety to sham treatment in a randomized controlled trial setting. METHODS: 40 primary snoring patients (≥ 18 year, AHI < 15e/h, BMI ≤ 30) were randomized to receive either 3 sessions NightLase or sham laser treatment. The main outcome measures were Snore Outcomes Survey (SOS), the Spouse/Bed Partner Survey (SBPS), a visual analogue snoring scale (bed partner) and a visual analogue pain scale. RESULTS: NightLase was well tolerated, no local anaesthesia was required (mean VAS pain score in NightLase group = 3.0 ± 1.7). No complications occurred. SOS, SBPS and VAS snoring scores improved in the NightLase group (33.7 ± 14.1 to 56.2 ± 16.1) (35.0 ± 17.1 to 61.5 ± 16.4) and (7.9 ± 2.0 to 4.7 ± 2.8) while no changing in the sham group (32.2 ± 14.5 vs 32.1 ± 13.0) (36.7 ± 12.1 vs 34.7 ± 12.7) (8.1 ± 1.7 vs 8.0 ± 1.6), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: NightLase is a safe, minimal invasive treatment that significantly reduced snoring compared to sham treatment.
Authors: Marijke Dieltjens; Annelies E Verbruggen; Marc J Braem; Kristien Wouters; Johan A Verbraecken; Wilfried A De Backer; Evert Hamans; Paul H Van de Heyning; Olivier M Vanderveken Journal: JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg Date: 2015-10 Impact factor: 6.223
Authors: Henryk Frelich; Wojciech Ścierski; Magdalena Marków; Jakub Frelich; Hanna Frelich; Misiołek Maciej Journal: Lasers Med Sci Date: 2019-02-14 Impact factor: 3.161
Authors: Karl A Franklin; Heidi Anttila; Susanna Axelsson; Thorarinn Gislason; Paula Maasilta; Kurt I Myhre; Nina Rehnqvist Journal: Sleep Date: 2009-01 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: Kate Sutherland; Olivier M Vanderveken; Hiroko Tsuda; Marie Marklund; Frederic Gagnadoux; Clete A Kushida; Peter A Cistulli Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2014-02-15 Impact factor: 4.062