# Controversial Aspects in Sedative Techniques for Drug-Induced Sleep Endoscopy (DISE)—A Narrative Review

## TL;DR

This review examines different sedation methods for a sleep test used in sleep apnea, highlighting the lack of consensus and safety considerations.

## Contribution

The paper provides a narrative review comparing sedative agents and techniques for DISE, emphasizing the need for standardized protocols.

## Key findings

- Propofol offers rapid sedation but increases airway collapsibility at higher doses.
- Dexmedetomidine induces a natural sleep-like state with minimal respiratory depression.
- BIS monitoring is recommended to guide sedation and avoid artifactual airway collapse.

## Abstract

Background/Objectives: Drug-induced sleep endoscopy (DISE) is used in obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) to visualize dynamic upper airway collapse, but sedation protocols vary widely with no consensus on the optimal agent or technique. This narrative review aims to clarify current sedation strategies for DISE in OSA and their clinical implications. Methods: We systematically searched PubMed, Scopus, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library for English-language publications on DISE sedation (2000–2025). Relevant clinical studies, guidelines, and reviews were included. Data were qualitatively synthesized due to heterogeneity among studies. Results: Sedation approaches in DISE varied considerably. Propofol, dexmedetomidine, and midazolam were the primary agents identified. Propofol provided rapid, titratable sedation but increased airway collapsibility at higher doses; dexmedetomidine produced a more natural sleep-like state with minimal respiratory depression; midazolam was less favored due to prolonged effects. Use of target-controlled infusion (TCI) and pharmacokinetic–pharmacodynamic (PK–PD) models improved control of propofol sedation. Co-sedative adjuncts (e.g., opioids) reduced the required sedative dose but added risk of respiratory depression. Careful titration to the lowest effective dose-often guided by bispectral index (BIS) monitoring—was emphasized to achieve adequate sedation without artifactual airway collapse. No universal DISE sedation protocol was identified. Conclusions: Optimal DISE sedation balances adequate depth with patient safety to ensure reliable findings. Using the minimum effective dose, guided by objective monitoring (e.g., BIS), is recommended. There is a need for standardized sedation protocols and further research (e.g., in obese patients) to resolve current controversies and improve DISE’s utility in OSA management.