ArticleThe Laryngoscope2026
Insomnia as a Clinical Predictor of Hypoglossal Nerve Stimulation Settings and Treatment Success.
Article in The Laryngoscope, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
objectivesTo examine the impact of comorbid insomnia and obstructive sleep apnea (COMISA) on hypoglossal nerve stimulation (HNS) stimulation levels and rates of therapeutic success.
methodsA retrospective chart review included adult OSA patients who received HNS surgery. Demographic information, baseline Insomnia Severity Index (ISI), pre and post implant sleep studies, and HNS stimulation data were collected. HNS therapy success was evaluated as ≥ 50% AHI reduction and AHI ≤ 15 (Sher15 criteria) and based on HNS treatment pathways using AHI symptoms and adherence.
resultsThe cohort included 80 OSA patients treated with HNS therapy including 35.5% (n = 30) with pre-surgery COMISA based on ISI score ≥ 15. COMISA patients had lower therapeutic HNS stimulation levels (1.5 V (COMISA) vs. 1.9 V, p < 0.01) and lower mean HNS stimulation level change from baseline (0.8 V (COMISA) vs. 1.01 V, p < 0.05) compared to non-COMISA patients. Fewer COMISA patients met Sher15 criteria (33.3% (n = 10) (COMISA) vs. 62.0% (n = 31), p = 0.02). When classifying COMISA and non-COMISA patients by post-operative HNS pathways, 60.0% (n = 18) of COMISA patients were within the Yellow Pathway Type 2 (adequate adherence, Sher15 nonresponse) compared to 32.0% (n = 16) of non-COMISA (p = 0.02), with no significant differences in rates within the other pathways.
conclusionCOMISA patients have lower therapeutic HNS stimulation levels, fewer stimulation level changes, and reduced rates of achieving Sher15 success criteria compared to those without COMISA. Managing expectations during stimulation uptitration and balancing implant stimulation tolerance and effectivness are required to optimize HNS outcomes. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3:
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.