A Pilot Study of an Endoluminal-Suturing Device as a Treatment Strategy for Patients With Obesity and Obstructive Sleep Apnea

Article information

Sleep Med Res. 2024;15(3):203-209
Publication date (electronic) : 2024 September 27
doi : https://doi.org/10.17241/smr.2024.02222
1Department of Pneumology, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles (H.U.B.), C.U.B. Hôpital Erasme, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium
2Department of Gastroenterology, Hepatopancreatology and Digestive Oncology, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles (H.U.B.), C.U.B. Hôpital Erasme, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium
3Department of Psychiatry, Hôpital Universitaire de Bruxelles (H.U.B.), C.U.B. Hôpital Erasme, Université Libre de Bruxelles, Brussels, Belgium
Corresponding Author Olivier Taton, MD Department of Pneumology, Hôpital Erasme, 808 Route de Lennik, 1070 Brussels, Belgium Tel +32-25555349 Fax +32-25554111 E-mail olivier.taton@hubruxelles.be
*These authors contributed equally to this work.
Received 2024 March 25; Revised 2024 May 28; Accepted 2024 June 27.

Abstract

Background and Objective

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a multifactorial disease, and obesity is the most prevalent risk factor for OSA. Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is a minimally-invasive procedure used for treating obesity. This prospective study tested the potential benefit of weight loss via an ESG device, endomina®, for reduction of apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) in patients with class I obesity and severe OSA.

Methods

Ten patients with BMI values of 28 to 34.9 kg/m2 and severe OSA underwent ESG and lifestyle management for 6 months. Patients underwent polysomnography before and 6 months after the endoscopic procedure. The primary endpoint was the percentage of AHI reduction six months after the endoscopic procedure. Secondary endpoints were the proportion of patients with AHI reductions of 50% six months after ESG, improvements in respiratory parameters and sleepiness, effectiveness on weight loss, and correlations with decreased AHI.

Results

Patients experienced 54% (±11%) reductions in AHI. Seven patients had an AHI reduction of ≥50%, and five had an AHI of <15 events/h. Total body weight loss (TBWL) and excess weight loss (EWL) were 10.1% (±3.4%) and 45.4% (±14.0%), respectively, and there was no correlation between AHI and TBWL/EWL. There was an overall improvement in respiratory sleep parameters after ESG, except for snoring, and a reduction in daytime sleepiness.

Conclusions

These results suggest that using an ESG device, endomina®, with lifestyle modification for promoting weight loss in class I obese patients with severe OSA is a promising treatment strategy for reducing OSA and improving respiratory parameters and daytime sleepiness.

INTRODUCTION

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a chronic and multifactorial disease characterized by increased pharyngeal airway resistance during sleep with subsequent repetitive collapse of the upper airway [1]. OSA is associated with decreased quality of life [2] and is a risk factor for cardiovascular disease [3], diabetes [4], stroke [5], premature death [6], and reduced cognitive function [7].

Obesity is the most prevalent risk factor for OSA, with a prevalence of more than 40% in patients with a body mass index (BMI) ≥30 kg/m2 [1]. Therefore, weight loss is the cornerstone of treatment for patients with obesity-associated OSA [8]. There is evidence that bariatric surgery is effective for improvement of OSA with a reported 65% reduction in apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) in patients with a BMI >40 kg/m2 [9]. However, evidence related to the effects of weight loss on OSA in less obese patients, but in whom the prevalence of OSA could be as high as 70%, is limited [8].

Recently, endoscopic endoluminal approaches to address Class I and II obese patients (BMI ranging from 30 to 39.9 kg/m2) have become a topic of interest. Endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) is a novel, safe, and less invasive restrictive endoluminal approach for patients with a BMI of 28 to 34.9 kg/m2 [10]. ESG is an incisionless procedure done by endoscopy (instead of coelioscopy) where a suturing device is inserted through the mouth to reduce the size of the stomach. Sutures are placed in the gastric body (anterior to posterior wall) to reduce the size of the stomach and induce a gastroparesis. As sleeve gastrectomy, the reduction of the size of the stomach induces early satiety limiting oral intakes and metabolic changes that induce weight loss [11]. The advantages of this technique are short time procedure (around 1 hour) with fast recovery (day clinic) and patients can go back to work after a few days (one to five) [11]. Efficiency of ESG is less than sleeve gastrectomy (16% total body weight loss [TBWL] in meta-analysis vs. 25% TBWL for sleeve gastrectomy) but morbidity is also less (around 2% for ESG vs. 5% for sleeve gastrectomy) [12]. Moreover, adverse events related to ESG are anecdotal (gastrointestinal discomfort) [10] while those related to bariatric surgery can be lifethreatening [13]. Based on a risk/benefit approach (balance between acceptability of complications and efficiency of treatment), recent guidelines proposed that the more invasive techniques (bariatric surgery) were reserved for patients with a high risk of obesity related comorbidities (BMI >40 kg/m2 or ≥35 kg/m2 with comorbidities) [14] while patients with a BMI ranging from 28 to 34.9 kg/m2 with comorbidities or 35 to 39.9 kg/m2 without comorbidities are candidate for endoscopic bariatric and metabolic therapies as first line of treatment [11].

A meta-analysis that evaluated the effects of ESG on obesity-related comorbidities reported an overall reduction of 50% in AHI after ESG [15]. However, the included studies were performed in patients with a BMI >35 kg/m2 and without any sleep analyses [16-19].

This study aimed to evaluate the efficacy of ESG via endoluminal gastric plication using an endoluminal-suturing device to improve severe OSA in patients with BMI values ranging from 28 to 34.9 kg/m2.

METHODS

This prospective, monocentric study was performed between November 2021 and February 2023. The protocol was approved by the Research Ethics Committee of Erasme Hospital in Brussels, Belgium (SRB2020/274). All enrolled patients provided written informed consent before the procedure. This study is registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04979234).

Study Group

Patients were recruited through a multidisciplinary platform with all physicians involved in the treatment of obesity including gastroenterologists, abdominal surgeons, endocrinologist, pneumologists, dieticians, physiotherapists, and psychologists. In this multidisciplinary platform, every patient who had a complete bariatric workup are discussed in a multidisciplinary meeting to select the best therapy according to published guidelines and patient’s will. In our study, every class I obese patient with a BMI between 28 and 34.9 kg/m2 underwent a complete multidisciplinary bariatric workup with a baseline polysomnography (PSG). In cases of severe OSA (AHI ≥30/h), patients were assigned to undergo ESG with endomina® (EndoTools Therapeutics S.A., Gosselies, Belgium) plus lifestyle management for 6 months. Complete eligibility criteria for ESG are described in Supplementary Materials (in the online-only Data Supplement).

Patients with a BMI ranging from 28 and 34.9 kg/m2 were selected in our study as it is the recommendations of the recently published guidelines [11] and only few data are available concerning the evolution of OSA after weight loss in this particular population. Moreover, we selected patients with severe OSA as we think that they were more likely to present an improvement of their AHI.

Demographic data, TBWL and percentage excess weight loss (EWL), which is the difference between initial BMI and final BMI divided by the difference between initial BMI and a BMI of 25 kg/m2, were collected at 1, 3, and 6 months after the endoscopic procedure.

Endoluminal Procedure and Postoperative Course

The endomina® is a triangulation platform used with any flexible endoscope and a dedicated needle (TAPES, EndoTools Therapeutics S.A., Gosselies, Belgium) to create gastrointestinal tissue approximations. Sutures were placed in the gastric body, starting from the incisura and going up to the fundo-gastric junction, according to a previously described technique (Fig. 1) [10]. Sutures were placed anterior to posterior (double plications) in a single pattern (i.e., single-layer suturing) to tubulize and reduce the stomach volume (Fig. 1). All procedures were done under general anesthesia with oro-tracheal intubation. Patients were kept overnight per protocol. Patients received antispasmodic and antiemetic drugs for 10 days and a proton pump inhibitor for 3 months. They were on a liquid diet for 3 days after the procedure and then returned to solid food within 10 days. EndoTools Therapeutics provided a research grant including the endomina® platforms, TAPES suturing devices, and technical support upon request.

Fig. 1.

Illustration of endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) with endomina®. A: The endomina device is shown inside the stomach before starting the procedure. B: The gastric plications start with an incisura (*). C: To perform the gastric plications the endoscope is grasping the gastric tissue while the needle is piercing all the layers of the stomach with the endomina® device. D: The aspect of the gastric plications at the end of the ESG procedure is shown; plications can be seen alongside the greater curvature at the incisura to the upper part of the gastric body. Threads are visible.

Dietetic Support

Face-to-face dietetic consultations with a trained dietician were performed throughout the study. A dietary evaluation was performed before the procedure, at 2 weeks and at 1, 3, and 6 months post-procedure. Dietary consultations were free of charge for all patients. Patients were prescribed a low-calorie, high-protein diet and lifestyle counselling [14]. Physical activity was promoted.

Sleep Evaluation

Patients underwent an in-hospital overnight PSG at the sleep center conducted by experienced technicians before and 6 months after the endoscopic procedure. In the case of patients who were already undergoing continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) treatment, 1 week of CPAP washout was performed before PSG [20]. The patients did not nap on the monitoring day and did not drink tea, coffee, alcohol, or other beverages that would have interfered with their sleep. An experienced technician applied the scalp electrode per international standards [21]. The polysomnographic recordings performed in our unit meet the recommendations of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine [21] and are carried out with a B3IP system with a TC09 headbox (Medatec, Braine-le-chateau, Belgium). The applied PSG montage was as follows: two electro-oculogram channels, three electroencephalogram channels (F4-M1, C4-M1, and O2-M1, where M1 is A1 mastoid reference), one submental electromyogram channel, electrocardiogram, pressure cannula to detect oro-nasal airflow, finger pulse-oximetry, a microphone to record breathing sounds and snoring, plethysmographic inductive belts to measure thoracic and abdominal breathing, and anterior tibialis electrodes. Polysomnographic recordings were scored visually by physicians trained in sleep medicine following the American Academy of Sleep Medicine standards on the Interpretation of Sleep and Related Events [22]. Apnea was defined as a ≥90% drop in nasal and oral airflow from baseline and a continuous event of ≥10 seconds, with or without thoracic and abdominal respiratory movements. Hypopnea was defined as a decline in nasal and oral airflow of ≥30% from the baseline with a continuous event of ≥10 seconds, accompanied by a decrease in oxygen saturation of ≥3% or an event with arousal. The AHI is the combined average number of apneas and hypopneas per hour of sleep. The oxygen desaturation index (ODI) obtained from the PSG was defined as the number of times oxygen saturation decreases by ≥3%/h during sleep. Sleep duration with an oxygen saturation of less than 90% (T90) and arousal index were recorded. The patients filled out the Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS) the day before each PSG.

Objectives

The primary endpoint of the study was the percentage of AHI reduction 6 months after the endoscopic procedure.

Secondary endpoints were as follows: 1) effectiveness on OSA defined as the proportion of patients with AHI reduction of 50% at 6 months after the endoscopic procedure; 2) improvements in respiratory sleep parameters (ODI, T90, snoring, and the arousal index) evaluated by an overnight PSG at 6 months; 3) improvements in sleepiness evaluated by the ESS; and 4) effectiveness on weight loss, defined as the reduction of EWL and TBWL 6 months after the endoscopic procedure, and its correlation with a decrease in AHI.

Statistical Analysis

Data were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics for Windows v27 (IBM Corp., Armonk, NY, USA). Descriptive statistics were computed for all study variables. Discrete variables were expressed as count (percentage), and continuous variables as mean ± standard deviation (SD) or median (interquartile range). Paired t-test or Wilcoxon rank test was used for comparisons with baseline data, as appropriate. For EWL and TBWL, the treatment effect was assessed using linear mixed models with time as a repeated factor. The fixed effects estimates are reported as means with 95% confidence intervals (CI). The association between variables was set by estimating their correlation with a Pearson correlation test. All statistical tests were two-tailed, and a p-value <0.05 was considered statistically significant.

RESULTS

The study enrolled ten patients (mean age: 51 ± 11 years). The baseline characteristics and clinical data for these ten patients are summarized in Table 1. Eight out of ten were female. Three patients were active smokers (10 pack-year). Six patients reported drinking alcohol more than two units per day. All patients underwent ESG with endomina® with a technical success rate of 100%. Two of ten patients complained of transient mild epigastric pain and/or dyspeptic symptoms (early satiety, belching) post-procedure that did not require medication and resolved within 4 weeks.

Demographic and clinical data before and 6 months after ESG

Overall, patients experienced a 54% (±11%) reduction in AHI 6 months after the endoscopic procedure. Seven patients (70%) experienced an AHI reduction ≥50%, and five (50%) had AHI values of <15 events/h at 6 months after ESG. The evolution of respiratory sleep parameters and sleepiness 6 months after ESG are summarized in Table 2. The evolution of the ESS at baseline, 1, 3, and 6 months after ESG is shown in Fig. 2.

Changes in respiratory sleep parameters and ESS between baseline and 6 months after ESG

Fig. 2.

Evolution of the Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS). ESG, endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty; M1, 1 month after ESG; M3, 3 months after ESG; M6, 6 months after ESG.

There was a significant reduction in BMI at 6 months after ESG (32.3 ± 1.6 kg/m2 vs. 29.1 ± 1.9 kg/m2, p < 0.001). Six months after ESG, TBWL was 10.1% ± 3.4% and EWL was 45.4% ± 14.0%. There was no evidence of a significant correlation between AHI and TBWL or between AHI and EWL 6 months after the endoscopic procedure.

DISCUSSION

This pilot study suggests that weight loss after endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty by endomina®, in combination with routine dietary and lifestyle counseling, induces 1) a reduction in AHI, 2) an improvement in respiratory sleep parameters, and 3) a reduction in daytime sleepiness, 6 months after the endoscopic procedure in patients with BMI values ranging from 28 to 34.9 kg/m2. These results warrant further discussion regarding weight loss, respiratory sleep parameters, and daytime sleepiness.

In terms of weight loss, all indicators were improved after ESG by endomina®, confirming that this treatment is clinically safe and effective. These improvements were in line with those in previously reported studies [10]. Considering the clinical outcome of each patient, one patient (patient 1) did not improve after ESG as she had no substantial decrease in EWL (-23%) or in AHI (+13 events/h). Interestingly, this particular patient did not change her dietary habits after ESG and, therefore, did not reach the goal in terms of weight [23]. This patient must be considered a treatment failure. However, the treatment non-responder rate observed in this study aligns with previously reported data (10% vs. 15%) [10].

With 70% of patients experiencing a reduction in AHI of more than 50%, ESG-induced weight loss is effective for treating OSA in patients with BMI values ranging from 28 to 34.9 kg/m2. These results align with data published following bariatric surgery [24]. Moreover, half of the patients had a post-ESG AHI of less than 15 events, allowing them to stop CPAP treatment. These results are more significant than previously reported studies of the effects of ESG on OSA (50% vs. 18%) [25]. As our patients presented with several predictive factors for persistent OSA after weight loss (preoperative AHI ≥30 events/h and EWL <60%), these results are lower than the evolution of AHI after bariatric surgery (50% vs. 74%) [26]. There was no significant correlation between the change in AHI and weight loss. These findings have already been described after bariatric surgery [27] and could be explained, at least partly, by the presence of metabolic and weight-independent factors that influence sleep [28,29].

There was an overall improvement in respiratory sleep parameters after ESG in our patients, except for snoring. This is probably due to high variability in snoring in our population. These results confirm the impact of ESG on OSA severity. This has already been reported in a study on bariatric surgery [9,30].

Regarding symptoms of daytime sleepiness, there was a progressive improvement from the first month after ESG to 6 months in patients with BMI values ranging from 28 to 34.9 kg/m2. As the ESS score was reduced from 10 to 6 points, our patients significantly improved their sleep quality. Similar results have already been reported in a study on bariatric surgery [9,30].

In this study, we selected less obese patients (BMI ranging from 28 to 34.9 kg/m2) because nearly no data was available concerning the evolution of OSA after weight loss in this particular population. However, these patients remain at high risk of OSA as the prevalence of OSA in patients with a BMI ranging from 28 to 34.9 kg/m2 could be as high as 70% [8]. Moreover, ESG could be efficient, even with a low weight reduction, as a part of the improvement following weight loss depends on metabolic and weight-independent factors [29]. Therefore, the recent guidelines recommend endoscopic bariatric and metabolic therapies as first line of treatment for patients with a BMI ranging from 28 to 34.9 kg/m2 with comorbidities [11]. These recommendations are based on a risk/benefit approach: as these patients are less obese, a loss of 16% of TBWL after ESG should be enough to reduce obesity-related comorbidities with a decreased risk of adverse events [12].

The limitations of this study are inherent to a pilot study without randomization, with a small number of patients included, and with the COVID-19 pandemic occurring during recruitment. However, even with a small population, the results are promising. Larger randomized controlled trials are needed to confirm these preliminary results. Nonetheless, this pilot study provides data that support the further investigation of ESG as an alternative to bariatric surgery to treat obesity-related comorbidities in less obese patients.

The strength of this study is its prospective design, which included two in-hospital overnight PSGs with a CPAP washout and high patient compliance.

In conclusion, weight loss induced by ESG with endomina®, in addition to lifestyle modification in patients with BMI values ranging from 28 to 34.9 kg/m2, achieves a significant reduction in OSA with improved respiratory sleep parameters and daytime sleepiness. As this was a pilot study, further randomized controlled trials should be performed to confirm these results.

Supplementary Materials

The online-only Data Supplement is available with this article at https://doi.org/10.17241/smr.2024.02222.

Notes

Availability of Data and Material

The datasets generated or analyzed during the study are available from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: all authors. Data curation: all authors. Formal analysis: all authors. Funding acquisition: Vincent Huberty. Investigation: all authors. Project administration: Vincent Huberty. Resources: Vincent Huberty. Supervision: Vincent Huberty. Writing—original draft: Olivier Taton. Writing—review & editing: all authors.

Conflicts of Interest

EndoTools Therapeutics SA (Gosselies, Belgium) provided a grant covering medical devices and data management. Dr. Huberty is a shareholder in EndoTools Therapeutics SA, a spin-off from the Université libre de Bruxelles. The other authors do not have any competing interests to report.

Funding Statement

This study was supported by EndoTools Therapeutics SA which provided a grant covering medical devices and technical support. However, EndoTools Therapeutics SA had no involvment in the study design; in the collection, analysis and interpretation of the data; in the writing of the report; and in the decision to submit the paper for publication.

Acknowledgements

The authors thank Mrs. L. Leclercq for advice and technical support. The authors acknowledge the contribution of a medical writer, Sandy Field, PhD, for English language editing of this manuscript.

References

1. Garvey JF, Pengo MF, Drakatos P, Kent BD. Epidemiological aspects of obstructive sleep apnea. J Thorac Dis 2015;7:920–9.
2. Baldwin CM, Griffith KA, Nieto FJ, O’Connor GT, Walsleben JA, Redline S. The association of sleep-disordered breathing and sleep symptoms with quality of life in the sleep heart health study. Sleep 2001;24:96–105.
3. Jean-Louis G, Zizi F, Clark LT, Brown CD, McFarlane SI. Obstructive sleep apnea and cardiovascular disease: role of the metabolic syndrome and its components. J Clin Sleep Med 2008;4:261–72.
4. Kendzerska T, Gershon AS, Hawker G, Tomlinson G, Leung RS. Obstructive sleep apnea and incident diabetes. A historical cohort study. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2014;190:218–25.
5. Redline S, Yenokyan G, Gottlieb DJ, Shahar E, O’Connor GT, Resnick HE, et al. Obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea and incident stroke: the Sleep Heart Health Study. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2010;182:269–77.
6. Young T, Finn L, Peppard PE, Szklo-Coxe M, Austin D, Nieto FJ, et al. Sleep disordered breathing and mortality: eighteen-year follow-up of the Wisconsin sleep cohort. Sleep 2008;31:1071–8.
7. Yaffe K, Laffan AM, Harrison SL, Redline S, Spira AP, Ensrud KE, et al. Sleep-disordered breathing, hypoxia, and risk of mild cognitive impairment and dementia in older women. JAMA 2011;306:613–9.
8. Fattal D, Hester S, Wendt L. Body weight and obstructive sleep apnea: a mathematical relationship between body mass index and apnea-hypopnea index in veterans. J Clin Sleep Med 2022;18:2723–9.
9. Wong AM, Barnes HN, Joosten SA, Landry SA, Dabscheck E, Mansfield DR, et al. The effect of surgical weight loss on obstructive sleep apnoea: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Sleep Med Rev 2018;42:85–99.
10. Huberty V, Boskoski I, Bove V, Van Ouytsel P, Costamagna G, Barthet MA, et al. Endoscopic sutured gastroplasty in addition to lifestyle modification: short-term efficacy in a controlled randomised trial. Gut 2021;70:1479–85.
11. Jirapinyo P, Hadefi A, Thompson CC, Patai ÁV, Pannala R, Goelder SK, et al. American Society for Gastrointestinal Endoscopy-European Society of Gastrointestinal Endoscopy guideline on primary endoscopic bariatric and metabolic therapies for adults with obesity. Gastrointest Endosc 2024;99:867–85.
12. Marincola G, Gallo C, Hassan C, Raffaelli M, Costamagna G, Bove V, et al. Laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy versus endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Endosc Int Open 2021;9:E87–95.
13. Arterburn DE, Telem DA, Kushner RF, Courcoulas AP. Benefits and risks of bariatric surgery in adults: a review. JAMA 2020;324:879–87.
14. Mechanick JI, Apovian C, Brethauer S, Timothy Garvey W, Joffe AM, Kim J, et al. Clinical practice guidelines for the perioperative nutrition, metabolic, and nonsurgical support of patients undergoing bariatric procedures – 2019 update: cosponsored by American Association of Clinical Endocrinologists/American College of Endocrinology, The Obesity Society, American Society for Metabolic and Bariatric Surgery, Obesity Medicine Association, and American Society of Anesthesiologists. Obesity (Silver Spring) 2020;28:O1–58.
15. Fehervari M, Fadel MG, Alghazawi LOK, Das B, Rodríguez-Luna MR, Perretta S, et al. Medium-term weight loss and remission of comorbidities following endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Obes Surg 2023;33:3527–38.
16. Fiorillo C, Quero G, Vix M, Guerriero L, Pizzicannella M, Lapergola A, et al. 6-month gastrointestinal quality of life (QoL) results after endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty and laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: a propensity score analysis. Obes Surg 2020;30:1944–51.
17. Matteo MV, Bove V, Pontecorvi V, De Siena M, Ciasca G, Papi M, et al. Outcomes of endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty in the elder population. Obes Surg 2022;32:3390–7.
18. Espinet-Coll E, Nebreda-Durán J, Galvao-Neto M, Bautista-Altamirano C, Diaz-Galán P, Gómez-Valero JA, et al. Suture pattern does not influence outcomes of endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty in obese patients. Endosc Int Open 2020;8:E1349–58.
19. Bhandari M, Kosta S, Reddy M, Mathur W, Neto MG, Bhandari M. Four-year outcomes for endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty from a single centre in India. J Minim Access Surg 2023;19:101–6.
20. Vroegop AV, Smithuis JW, Benoist LB, Vanderveken OM, de Vries N. CPAP washout prior to reevaluation polysomnography: a sleep surgeon’s perspective. Sleep Breath 2015;19:433–9.
21. Berry RB, Brooks R, Gamaldo CE, Harding SM, Lloyd RM, Marcus CL, et al. The AASM manual for the scoring of sleep and associated events: rules, terminology and technical specifications (version 2.3) Darien: American Academy of Sleep Medicine; 2016.
22. Kapur VK, Auckley DH, Chowdhuri S, Kuhlmann DC, Mehra R, Ramar K, et al. Clinical practice guideline for diagnostic testing for adult obstructive sleep apnea: an American Academy of Sleep Medicine clinical practice guideline. J Clin Sleep Med 2017;13:479–504.
23. National Institutes of Health. Clinical guidelines on the identification, evaluation, and treatment of overweight and obesity in adults: the evidence report. Obes Res 1998;6(Suppl 2):51S–209.
24. Lettieri CJ, Eliasson AH, Greenburg DL. Persistence of obstructive sleep apnea after surgical weight loss. J Clin Sleep Med 2008;4:333–8.
25. Alexandre F, Lapergola A, Vannucci M, Pizzicannella M, D’Urso A, Saviano A, et al. Endoscopic management of obesity: impact of endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty on weight loss and co-morbidities at six months and one year. J Visc Surg 2023;160(2S):S38–46.
26. de Raaff CA, Coblijn UK, Ravesloot MJ, de Vries N, de Lange-de Klerk ES, van Wagensveld BA. Persistent moderate or severe obstructive sleep apnea after laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass: which patients? Surg Obes Relat Dis 2016;12:1866–72.
27. Del Genio G, Limongelli P, Del Genio F, Motta G, Docimo L, Testa D. Sleeve gastrectomy improves obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS): 5 year longitudinal study. Surg Obes Relat Dis 2016;12:70–4.
28. Ming X, Yang M, Chen X. Metabolic bariatric surgery as a treatment for obstructive sleep apnea hypopnea syndrome: review of the literature and potential mechanisms. Surg Obes Relat Dis 2021;17:215–20.
29. Amin R, Simakajornboon N, Szczesniak R, Inge T. Early improvement in obstructive sleep apnea and increase in orexin levels after bariatric surgery in adolescents and young adults. Surg Obes Relat Dis 2017;13:95–100.
30. Qin H, Wang Y, Chen X, Steenbergen N, Penzel T, Zhang X, et al. The efficacy of bariatric surgery on pulmonary function and sleep architecture of patients with obstructive sleep apnea and co-morbid obesity: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Surg Obes Relat Dis 2023;19:1444–57.

Article information Continued

Fig. 1.

Illustration of endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty (ESG) with endomina®. A: The endomina device is shown inside the stomach before starting the procedure. B: The gastric plications start with an incisura (*). C: To perform the gastric plications the endoscope is grasping the gastric tissue while the needle is piercing all the layers of the stomach with the endomina® device. D: The aspect of the gastric plications at the end of the ESG procedure is shown; plications can be seen alongside the greater curvature at the incisura to the upper part of the gastric body. Threads are visible.

Fig. 2.

Evolution of the Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS). ESG, endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty; M1, 1 month after ESG; M3, 3 months after ESG; M6, 6 months after ESG.

Table 1.

Demographic and clinical data before and 6 months after ESG

Patients Age (yr) Sex BMI (kg/m2)
AHI (events/h)
ESS score
Baseline After ESG Baseline After ESG Baseline After ESG
1 35 F 34.6 32.4 34 47 8 8
2 36 F 34.1 31.4 53 5 14 11
3 45 F 32.4 28.7 30 9 20 7
4 47 F 32.4 27.3 55 25 3 3
5 64 F 33.2 26.6 30 12 5 5
6 47 F 31.7 30 59 14 13 4
7 49 M 32.4 29 34 34 18 9
8 64 F 30.1 27.6 54 6 8 7
9 61 M 32.9 29.5 69 41 5 2
10 65 F 29.4 26 67 33 8 6
Mean ± SD 51 ± 11 NA 32.3 ± 1.6 29.1 ± 1.9 48.5 ± 15.2 22 ± 10.7 10 ± 4 6 ± 2

BMI, body mass index; AHI, apnea-hypopnea index; ESS, Epworth sleepiness scale; ESG, endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty; F, female; M, male; SD, standard deviation.

Table 2.

Changes in respiratory sleep parameters and ESS between baseline and 6 months after ESG

Baseline After ESG Δ Δ% p-value
AHI* (events/h) 48.1 [36.8–59.4] 22.0 [11.3–32.7] 26.1 [13.1–39.1] 52.0 [26.2–77.7] 0.001
ODI (%) 32.0 [26.0–55.0] 13.0 [9.0–26.0] 20.5 [11.0–29.0] 53.9 [42.3–67.7] 0.013
T90 (min) 42.3 [4.0–145.0] 12.3 [0.0–25.5] 28.0 [2.0–107.0] 84.2 [53.3–100.0] 0.028
Snoring (%) 76.5 [46.0–91.0] 41.5 [17.0–81.0] 22.0 [-5.0–56.0] 30.1 [-10.9–75.4] 0.359
Arousal index (events/h) 37.0 [26.0–43.0] 15.0 [9.0–23.0] 19.0 [12.0–30.0] 47.4 [36.1–79.1] 0.008
ESS score 8.0 [5.0–14.0] 6.0 [4.0–9.0] 3.0 [0.0–9.0] 35.7 [0.0–60.0] 0.043

Values are expressed as medians and interquartile ranges. Δ is the arithmetic difference between the post-ESG and baseline values. Δ% is the percentage of change between the post-ESG and baseline values.

*

Mean (95% confidence interval);

Median (interquartile range).

ESS, Epworth sleepiness scale; ESG, endoscopic sleeve gastroplasty; AHI, apnea-hypopnea index; ODI, oxygen desaturation index; %, percentage of sleep duration; T90, duration of sleep with an oxygen saturation less than 90%.