BACKGROUND: Oral appliances (OAs) that advance the mandible can improve the intake of oxygen and reduce the number of apneic episodes in patients who have obstructive sleep apnea. Although OAs are not as effective as continuous positive airway pressure therapy, they are an important therapeutic consideration for patients with obstructive sleep apnea. However, the ability to predict efficacy of OAs is limited. The authors conducted a study to assess the value of relevant clinical and cephalometric variables that can help predict the outcome of OA use in an Asian population. METHODS: Fifty-two Taiwanese patients consecutively treated with OAs were included in the study. Relevant clinical and cephalometric variables were determined at baseline. Treatment success was defined as a reduction of more than 50 percent in the apnea-hypopnea index and the residual apnea-hypopnea index less than 10 per hour with OAs. The predictive value of variables for treatment outcome was evaluated by means of univariate and multivariate analyses. A receiver operating characteristic curve for the multivariate logistic regression model was constructed. RESULTS: A good outcome was found in 29 participants (56 percent). Minimal retroglossal airway, mandibular position and anterior face height were significant predictors of OA treatment success. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.862, reflecting good model discrimination. CONCLUSIONS: Some cephalometric variables had a predictive value for the outcome of OA use. OA treatment outcome was favorable in patients with certain craniofacial structures such as narrow minimal retroglossal airway, mandibular retrusion and short anterior face height. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Practitioners should consider OAs for treatment of patients with obstructive sleep apnea who have narrow minimal retroglossal airways, mandibular retrusion and short anterior face heights.
BACKGROUND: Oral appliances (OAs) that advance the mandible can improve the intake of oxygen and reduce the number of apneic episodes in patients who have obstructive sleep apnea. Although OAs are not as effective as continuous positive airway pressure therapy, they are an important therapeutic consideration for patients with obstructive sleep apnea. However, the ability to predict efficacy of OAs is limited. The authors conducted a study to assess the value of relevant clinical and cephalometric variables that can help predict the outcome of OA use in an Asian population. METHODS: Fifty-two Taiwanese patients consecutively treated with OAs were included in the study. Relevant clinical and cephalometric variables were determined at baseline. Treatment success was defined as a reduction of more than 50 percent in the apnea-hypopnea index and the residual apnea-hypopnea index less than 10 per hour with OAs. The predictive value of variables for treatment outcome was evaluated by means of univariate and multivariate analyses. A receiver operating characteristic curve for the multivariate logistic regression model was constructed. RESULTS: A good outcome was found in 29 participants (56 percent). Minimal retroglossal airway, mandibular position and anterior face height were significant predictors of OA treatment success. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.862, reflecting good model discrimination. CONCLUSIONS: Some cephalometric variables had a predictive value for the outcome of OA use. OA treatment outcome was favorable in patients with certain craniofacial structures such as narrow minimal retroglossal airway, mandibular retrusion and short anterior face height. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: Practitioners should consider OAs for treatment of patients with obstructive sleep apnea who have narrow minimal retroglossal airways, mandibular retrusion and short anterior face heights.
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: Erin V Mosca; Sabina Bruehlmann; Shaelynn M Zouboules; Alexandra E Chiew; Curtis Westersund; Dillon A Hambrook; Seyed A Zareian Jahromi; Joshua Grosse; Zbigniew L Topor; Shouresh Charkhandeh; John E Remmers Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2022-03-01 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: Pedro Dias Ferraz; Inês Francisco; Maria Inês Borges; Adriana Guimarães; Fátima Carvalho; Francisco Caramelo; José Pedro Figueiredo; Francisco Vale Journal: Life (Basel) Date: 2022-06-02
Authors: Daniel Vena; Ali Azarbarzin; Melania Marques; Sara Op de Beeck; Olivier M Vanderveken; Bradley A Edwards; Nicole Calianese; Lauren B Hess; Reza Radmand; Garun S Hamilton; Simon A Joosten; Luigi Taranto-Montemurro; Sang-Wook Kim; Johan Verbraecken; Marc Braem; David P White; Scott A Sands; Andrew Wellman Journal: Sleep Date: 2020-07-13 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: Terri E Weaver; Michael W Calik; Sarah S Farabi; Anne M Fink; Maria T Galang-Boquiren; Mary C Kapella; Bharati Prasad; David W Carley Journal: Nat Sci Sleep Date: 2014-11-18