Evidence Hub

Adenotonsillectomy Versus Watchful Waiting for Children with Obstructive Sleep Apnea Syndrome: A Systematic Review with Meta-Analysis

A. Tsikopoulos, Konstantinos Tsikopoulos, Fotios Dilmperis, Sofia Anastasiadou, K. Garefis, A. Fountarlis, S. Triaridis

Indian Journal of Otolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery, 2024

6 citations

Abstract

The treatment of children with Obstructive Sleep Apnea Syndrome (OSAS) remains a point of debate among otorhinolaryngologists worldwide. This study aims to comparatively assess the clinical outcomes of adenotonsillectomy (ATE) and watchful waiting in children with OSAS. We searched the databases of PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), until the 1st of October 2023. Comparative trials assessing the efficacy of adenotonsillectomy and watchful waiting in children with OSAS were considered. The primary outcome measure was the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI), and secondary outcomes included quality of life as measured by OSA-18 score, and mean SpO2 levels. A subgroup analysis evaluating the changes in AHI depending on the severity of the initial disease was also executed. We conducted a random-effects pairwise meta-analysis of change scores to include randomized and non-randomized controlled trials. The quality assessment was carried out by using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomized and the ROBINS-I tool for non-randomized trials, respectively. Two randomized and five non-randomized trials were included. There was a statistically significant difference regarding AHI in favor of the ATE group compared to the watchful waiting group (Standardized mean difference [SMD] was − 0.60, 95%CI −0.79 to −0.41, p < 0.001). Likewise, a statistically significant decrease in change scores for OSA-18 between ATE and watchful waiting was noted (SMD was…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a meta-analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 1 of 5 (Highest · pooled evidence). Pooled evidence from several studies sits at the top of the evidence pyramid.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free