Dataset Information

An evaluation of two different mandibular advancement devices on craniofacial characteristics and upper airway dimensions of Chinese adult obstructive sleep apnea patients.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

To evaluate the effects of two different mandibular advancement devices (MADs) on craniofacial characteristics and upper airway dimensions of Chinese adult patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA).

Materials and methods

Forty-five patients with OSA were recruited as part of a prospective randomized crossover trial for treatment with two different MADs. Lateral cephalograms were taken, and the Epworth Sleepiness Scale and the Sleep Apnea Quality of Life Index were completed at baseline.

Results

The Apnea-Hypoxia Index was highly significantly reduced with the monoblock (P < .001) and significantly reduced with the twin block (P < .01). The monoblock demonstrated a superior result than the twin block (P < .05). A significant reduction was found in the distances between the hyoid bone to retrognathia (monoblock, P < .01; twin block, P < .001) as well as the distance between the hyoid bone and mandibular plane angle (P < .001). Furthermore, soft palate length increased significantly (P < .05) with both MADs. However, the changes did not differ in favor of either MAD.

Conclusion

Monoblock was the better MAD to improve OSA severity. No difference could be found in changes of subjective OSA indicators. Significant but similar cephalometric changes were observed, indicating both MADs alter the position of the surrounding musculature and improve upper airway patency. Therefore, the different design features of the MADs suggest an impact on some OSA indicators.

SUBMITTER: Geoghegan F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8612034 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectivesTo compare the effects of two types of titratable mandibular advancement devices (MADs), namely MAD-H (allowing limited vertical opening) and MAD-S (allowing free vertical opening), on respiratory parameters and upper airway dimensions in patients with mild to moderate obstructive sleep apnea (OSA).Materials and methodsPatients with mild to moderate OSA (5 ≤ apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) < 30 /h) were randomly assigned to two parallel MAD groups. All MADs were subjectively titrated according to a standardized protocol during a 3-month follow-up. Every patient underwent two polysomnographic recordings, and two cone beam computed tomography scans in supine position: one at baseline and another one after 3 months with the MAD in situ. The primary outcome variables were the AHI in supine position (AHI-supine) and the minimal cross-sectional area of the upper airway in supine position (CSAmin-supine).ResultsA total of 49 patients were recruited, and 31 patients (21 men and 10 women) with a mean (± SD) age of 48.5 (± 13.9) years and a mean AHI of 16.6 (± 6.7) /h completed the study. In the per-protocol analysis, there was no significant difference between MAD-H (n = 16) and MAD-S (n = 15) in their effects on AHI-supine (P = 0.14) and CSAmin-supine (P = 0.59). Similar results were found in the intention-to-treat analysis (P = 0.47 and 0.57, respectively).ConclusionsWithin the limitations of this study, we conclude that there is no significant difference in the effects of an MAD allowing limited vertical opening and an MAD allowing free vertical opening on respiratory parameters and upper airway dimensions in patients with mild to moderate OSA.Clinical relevanceMADs allowing limited vertical opening and allowing free vertical opening have similar effects on respiratory parameters and upper airway dimensions in patients with mild to moderate OSA.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02724865. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02724865.

Project description:Study objectivesObstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a sleep-related breathing disorder, commonly managed by either continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) or a mandibular advancement device (MAD). Long-term follow-up and comparison regarding efficacy of these therapies is scarce. In this study the results of treatment, patient adherence, and satisfaction over a 10-year follow-up of these therapies are reported.MethodsThis is a longitudinal follow-up study taken from a subset of patients initially enrolled in a randomized controlled clinical trial of 103 patients with OSA (51 and 52 patients randomized for MAD and CPAP, respectively). After a 10-year follow-up period, 14 patients using MAD and 17 patients using CPAP could be evaluated for this longitudinal follow-up study. Data were analyzed at baseline, after 3 months and at 1-, 2-, and 10-year follow-up. All 31 patients with OSA underwent polysomnography and self-reported measurements.ResultsPolysomnography results showed a favorable outcome of both therapies at 10-year follow-up. At baseline, included patients in both groups did not significantly differ in apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) values. At 10-year follow-up, both the MAD and CPAP groups showed a significant reduction in AHI. At baseline the mean AHI in the MAD group was 31.7 ± 20.6 events/h whereas in the CPAP group it was 49.2 ± 26.1 events/h. At 10-year follow-up the mean AHI in the MAD group was 9.9 ± 10.3 events/h and in the CPAP group it was 3.4 ± 5.4 events/h. Both therapies resulted in a substantial improvement in self-reported neurobehavioral outcomes at 10-year follow-up.ConclusionsBoth CPAP and MAD therapy demonstrate good and stable treatment effects after a 10-year follow-up period. Therefore, when indicated, both therapies are appropriate modalities for the long-term management of OSA.Clinical trial registrationRegistry: Netherlands Trial Register; Name: Management of the Obstructive Sleep Apnea-Hypopnea Syndrome: Oral Appliance versus Continuous Positive Airway Pressure Therapy; Identifier: NL75; URL: https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/75.