ReviewOTO open
Coblation Versus Radiofrequency for Tongue Base Reduction in Obstructive Sleep Apnea: A Meta-analysis.
Review in OTO open. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Advancing Obstructive Sleep Apnea Management: Recent Trends from Conventional to Innovative Therapies.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Objective: The objective of this study is to determine the effectiveness and safety profile of coblation tongue base reduction (CBTR) compared to radiofrequency base of tongue (RFBOT) reduction on sleep-related outcomes in patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Data Sources: PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews databases. Review Methods: Literature search by 2 independent authors was conducted using the abovementioned databases. Studies on CBTR and RFBOT as part of OSA treatment in adult patients with pre- and postoperative apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) were included. Direct meta-analysis and single-arm meta-analysis were conducted to compare sleep-related outcomes (AHI, apnea index [AI], surgical success rates, Epworth sleepiness score [ESS], SpO Results: A total of 40 studies with a total of 1940 patients were included, of which 1440 individuals who underwent tongue base reduction interventions (RF = 306, RF + UPPP = 656, and coblation + UPPP = 482) met inclusion criteria. Pooled analysis showed significant improvements in AHI (CBTR = -22.84, RFBOT = -11.14), AI (CBTR = 15.64, RFBOT = -5.26), ESS (CBTR = -7.59, RFBOT = -7.18), mean oxygen saturation (CBTR = 7.43, RFBOT = 4.25), mean BMI (CBTR = -0.69, RFBOT = -4.09), and snoring visual analog scale (CBTR = -16.20, RFBOT = -18.21). Surgical success rate (postoperative AHI < 20 and drop >50% from baselines) was 70% for CBTR and 43% for RFBOT. Conclusion: Both interventions decreased sleep-related outcomes in adult patients with OSA. Coblation appears to exhibit superiority over radiofrequency with a similar safety profile. However, further studies with direct comparisons between both interventions must be performed.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.