Whitney Mostafiz1, Oyku Dalci2, Kate Sutherland3, Atul Malhotra4, Vasanth Srinivasan2, M Ali Darendeliler2, Peter A Cistulli5. 1. Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Sydney, Sydney Dental Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia; Harvard School of Dental Medicine, Boston, MA. 2. Department of Orthodontics, Faculty of Dentistry, University of Sydney, Sydney Dental Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia. 3. Woolcock Institute of Medical Research, University of Sydney, Department of Respiratory Medicine, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia; Centre for Sleep Health and Research, Department of Respiratory Medicine, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia. 4. Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA. 5. Woolcock Institute of Medical Research, University of Sydney, Department of Respiratory Medicine, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia; Centre for Sleep Health and Research, Department of Respiratory Medicine, Royal North Shore Hospital, Sydney, NSW, Australia. Electronic address: peter.cistulli@sydney.edu.au.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Mandibular advancement splints (MASs) can effectively treat obstructive sleep apnea (OSA); however, no validated and reliable prediction method for treatment outcome currently exists. The efficacy of MAS may relate to anatomic factors, including craniofacial size and upper-airway soft-tissue volume and anatomic balance between them. We aimed to assess whether craniofacial and oral measurements are associated with MAS treatment outcome. METHODS: Dental impressions and lateral cephalometric radiographs were obtained from patients with OSA prior to commencing MAS treatment. Intertooth distances and palatal depths were measured on dental casts, and standard cephalometric analysis was performed with the addition of cross-sectional area (CSA) of the tongue and bony oral enclosure. Treatment outcome was determined by polysomnography. RESULTS: Of 53 patients, 25 were complete responders (posttreatment apnea-hypopnea index [AHI] < 5/h), 17 were partial responders (≥ 50% AHI reduction), and 11 were nonresponders (< 50% AHI reduction). Cephalometric analyses did not reveal any significant differences between responders and nonresponders. Oral cavity measurements or CSA did not differ with treatment outcome; however, there was a trend toward a larger tongue CSA in complete vs partial and nonresponders (39.5 ± 1.3 cm(2) vs 35.5 ± 0.5 cm(2), P = .09). Tongue/oral enclosure CSA ratio, indicating a larger tongue for a given oral cavity size, was greater in complete responders (P = .012, n = 30). CONCLUSIONS: Oral dimensions do not appear to differ between patients who respond and those who do not respond to MAS treatment. However, the larger tongue for a given oral cavity size in responders suggests that MAS may help to correct anatomic imbalance. Further research to assess whether the ratio between tongue and bony oral enclosure size may be useful in selecting patients for MAS treatment is warranted.
BACKGROUND: Mandibular advancement splints (MASs) can effectively treat obstructive sleep apnea (OSA); however, no validated and reliable prediction method for treatment outcome currently exists. The efficacy of MAS may relate to anatomic factors, including craniofacial size and upper-airway soft-tissue volume and anatomic balance between them. We aimed to assess whether craniofacial and oral measurements are associated with MAS treatment outcome. METHODS: Dental impressions and lateral cephalometric radiographs were obtained from patients with OSA prior to commencing MAS treatment. Intertooth distances and palatal depths were measured on dental casts, and standard cephalometric analysis was performed with the addition of cross-sectional area (CSA) of the tongue and bony oral enclosure. Treatment outcome was determined by polysomnography. RESULTS: Of 53 patients, 25 were complete responders (posttreatment apnea-hypopnea index [AHI] < 5/h), 17 were partial responders (≥ 50% AHI reduction), and 11 were nonresponders (< 50% AHI reduction). Cephalometric analyses did not reveal any significant differences between responders and nonresponders. Oral cavity measurements or CSA did not differ with treatment outcome; however, there was a trend toward a larger tongue CSA in complete vs partial and nonresponders (39.5 ± 1.3 cm(2) vs 35.5 ± 0.5 cm(2), P = .09). Tongue/oral enclosure CSA ratio, indicating a larger tongue for a given oral cavity size, was greater in complete responders (P = .012, n = 30). CONCLUSIONS: Oral dimensions do not appear to differ between patients who respond and those who do not respond to MAS treatment. However, the larger tongue for a given oral cavity size in responders suggests that MAS may help to correct anatomic imbalance. Further research to assess whether the ratio between tongue and bony oral enclosure size may be useful in selecting patients for MAS treatment is warranted.
Authors: Clete A Kushida; Michael R Littner; Timothy Morgenthaler; Cathy A Alessi; Dennis Bailey; Jack Coleman; Leah Friedman; Max Hirshkowitz; Sheldon Kapen; Milton Kramer; Teofilo Lee-Chiong; Daniel L Loube; Judith Owens; Jeffrey P Pancer; Merrill Wise Journal: Sleep Date: 2005-04 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: C Monasterio; A Navarro; S Farreras; A Marí; T Brinquis; R Estopà; F Manresa Journal: Arch Bronconeumol Date: 2000 Jul-Aug Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: B Piskin; O Karakoc; H Genc; S Akay; C Sipahi; M Erdem; B Karaman; S Gorgulu; S Yetkin; S Ayyildiz Journal: J Orofac Orthop Date: 2015-01-22 Impact factor: 1.938
Authors: John Reid; Regina Taylor-Gjevre; John Gjevre; Robert Skomro; Mark Fenton; Femi Olatunbosun; John R Gordon; David Cotton Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2013-04-15 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: Toru Ogawa; Jianlan Long; Kate Sutherland; Andrew S L Chan; Keiichi Sasaki; Peter A Cistulli Journal: Sleep Breath Date: 2015-01-13 Impact factor: 2.816
Authors: Pamela N Deyoung; Jessie P Bakker; Scott A Sands; Salma Batool-Anwar; James G Connolly; James P Butler; Atul Malhotra Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2013-11-15 Impact factor: 4.062