0658 Total Intravenous Anesthesia versus Inhaled Anesthetics in Patients with Obstructive Sleep Apnea: A Systematic Review

Abstract Introduction Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA) increases the risk of perioperative respiratory and cardiovascular complications, making anesthetic selection crucial for patient safety. Both total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) and inhalational anesthesia are used in patients with OSA, but their perioperative outcomes remain uncertain. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of TIVA compared with inhalational anesthesia for patients with OSA. Methods Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, a comprehensive search was performed across PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar through October 2025. Primary outcomes were postoperative respiratory complications. Secondary outcomes included extubation time, post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) length of stay, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), and 30-day morbidity or mortality. Meta-analysis was intended to be conducted using R software under a random-effects model, and the risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2.0 and ROBINS-I tools. Results A total of 266 records were identified through database searches. After screening and eligibility assessment, four studies met inclusion criteria, encompassing 631 participants in total. All studies were conducted between 2019 and 2020 at a single tertiary academic center in the United States. Because all eligible studies were conducted at the same institution and time frame, involving potentially overlapping patient populations, a quantitative meta-analysis was not performed to avoid double counting. Instead, findings were synthesized qualitatively. The studies included one randomized controlled trial and three retrospective comparative cohort studies. Across studies, mean age ranged 55.4 ± 12.1 to 56.2 ± 12.4 years and BMI from 29.7 ± 4.3 to 29.8 ± 3.6 kg/m2. Overall, 75% of the studies reported a significant reduction in Phase I or total recovery time with total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) compared with inhalational anesthesia, while one study (25%) found no statistically significant difference. No other significant differences were found. Conclusion TIVA provides comparable safety and faster postoperative recovery than inhalational anesthesia in adults with OSA, without increasing respiratory complications or PONV. These findings support TIVA as a viable anesthetic approach for OSA patients, particularly in upper airway surgeries where postoperative airway control is critical. Further randomized trials with standardized outcomes are warranted to confirm the results and strengthen recommendations. Support (if any)

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
SLEEP
Published
2026-05-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/sleep/zsag091.0657
Primary Topic
Obstructive Sleep Apnea Research
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

0658 Total Intravenous Anesthesia versus Inhaled Anesthetics in Patients with Obstructive Sleep Apnea: A Systematic Review

Verónica Argüello Ramírez, Maria A. Hernandez, Brenda Cunningham, E. Martínez et al.
SLEEP
Obstructive Sleep Apnea Research
article

0658 Total Intravenous Anesthesia versus Inhaled Anesthetics in Patients with Obstructive Sleep Apnea: A Systematic Review

Verónica Argüello Ramírez, Maria A. Hernandez, Brenda Cunningham, E. Martínez, Jawad Mchaik, Omar Alejandro Borges-Sosa, Edgar Morales Septien, Hugo Silva-Contreras, Elisa M Ortiz Santiago, Judith Marcela Idrovo Molina, Sushmitha Asaithambi, Panaiyappan Arunachalam, Pietro Bazan Mckenzie
article en

Abstract

Abstract Introduction Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA) increases the risk of perioperative respiratory and cardiovascular complications, making anesthetic selection crucial for patient safety. Both total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) and inhalational anesthesia are used in patients with OSA, but their perioperative outcomes remain uncertain. This systematic review aimed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of TIVA compared with inhalational anesthesia for patients with OSA. Methods Following PRISMA 2020 guidelines, a comprehensive search was performed across PubMed, MEDLINE, Web of Science, CINAHL, Cochrane Library, and Google Scholar through October 2025. Primary outcomes were postoperative respiratory complications. Secondary outcomes included extubation time, post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) length of stay, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), and 30-day morbidity or mortality. Meta-analysis was intended to be conducted using R software under a random-effects model, and the risk of bias was assessed using RoB 2.0 and ROBINS-I tools. Results A total of 266 records were identified through database searches. After screening and eligibility assessment, four studies met inclusion criteria, encompassing 631 participants in total. All studies were conducted between 2019 and 2020 at a single tertiary academic center in the United States. Because all eligible studies were conducted at the same institution and time frame, involving potentially overlapping patient populations, a quantitative meta-analysis was not performed to avoid double counting. Instead, findings were synthesized qualitatively. The studies included one randomized controlled trial and three retrospective comparative cohort studies. Across studies, mean age ranged 55.4 ± 12.1 to 56.2 ± 12.4 years and BMI from 29.7 ± 4.3 to 29.8 ± 3.6 kg/m2. Overall, 75% of the studies reported a significant reduction in Phase I or total recovery time with total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) compared with inhalational anesthesia, while one study (25%) found no statistically significant difference. No other significant differences were found. Conclusion TIVA provides comparable safety and faster postoperative recovery than inhalational anesthesia in adults with OSA, without increasing respiratory complications or PONV. These findings support TIVA as a viable anesthetic approach for OSA patients, particularly in upper airway surgeries where postoperative airway control is critical. Further randomized trials with standardized outcomes are warranted to confirm the results and strengthen recommendations. Support (if any)

SLEEPVol. 49(Supplement_1)
University of Guayaquil (EC), Universidad de Buenos Aires (AR), Yerevan Haybusak University (AM), Caucasus International University (GE), Universidad Anáhuac (MX), Medical University of the Americas (KN), Universidad Villa Rica (MX), Indiana University (US), Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (MX), The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston (US), Tecnológico de Monterrey (MX)
Good health and well-being
Openalex Percentile: Top 7%
Obstructive Sleep Apnea Research
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.