Elizabeth C Brown1,2, Shaokoon Cheng1,3,4, David K McKenzie2,5, Jane E Butler1,4, Simon C Gandevia1,2, Lynne E Bilston1,2. 1. Neuroscience Research Australia, Barker St, Randwick, Sydney, NSW, 2031, Australia. 2. Prince of Wales Clinical School, University of New South Wales, Australia. 3. Department of Engineering, Macquarie University, New South Wales, Australia. 4. School of Medical Sciences, University of New South Wales, Australia. 5. Prince of Wales Hospital, Sydney, Australia.
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine whether tongue stiffness (shear modulus) in patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is different for controls matched for age, sex, and body mass index (BMI), and to investigate the effect of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) on stiffness. DESIGN: Controlled experimental study. SETTING: Medical research institute. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with OSA and age-, sex-, and BMI-matched healthy controls. MEASUREMENTS: Magnetic resonance elastography was performed in nine patients with OSA (apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) > 15 events/h) and seven controls (AHI < 10 events/h) matched for age, sex, and BMI. Six of these OSA subjects were also scanned while 10 cmH2O CPAP was applied. Mean isotropic shear modulus and anisotropic shear moduli parallel and perpendicular to the muscle fascicles in the tongue were calculated. RESULTS: Tongue shear modulus in patients with OSA was lower than that in matched controls (2.68 ± 0.35 (mean ± standard deviation) kPa versus 2.98 ± 0.44 kPa, P < 0.001). Shear modulus decreased with increasing AHI (R = -0.496, P = 0.043), but not age, BMI, or percentage tongue fat. Anisotropic analysis revealed that reduction in stiffness was greatest parallel to the muscle fibers. CPAP had no significant effect on tongue shear modulus. CONCLUSIONS: In awake subjects with obstructive sleep apnea, the tongue is less stiff than in similar healthy subjects and this difference occurs in the muscle fiber direction. CPAP did not significantly reduce tongue stiffness. Thus, any change in neural drive to genioglossus during wakefulness is insufficient to restore normal tongue stiffness.
STUDY OBJECTIVES: This study aimed to determine whether tongue stiffness (shear modulus) in patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is different for controls matched for age, sex, and body mass index (BMI), and to investigate the effect of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) on stiffness. DESIGN: Controlled experimental study. SETTING: Medical research institute. PARTICIPANTS: Patients with OSA and age-, sex-, and BMI-matched healthy controls. MEASUREMENTS: Magnetic resonance elastography was performed in nine patients with OSA (apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) > 15 events/h) and seven controls (AHI < 10 events/h) matched for age, sex, and BMI. Six of these OSA subjects were also scanned while 10 cmH2O CPAP was applied. Mean isotropic shear modulus and anisotropic shear moduli parallel and perpendicular to the muscle fascicles in the tongue were calculated. RESULTS: Tongue shear modulus in patients with OSA was lower than that in matched controls (2.68 ± 0.35 (mean ± standard deviation) kPa versus 2.98 ± 0.44 kPa, P < 0.001). Shear modulus decreased with increasing AHI (R = -0.496, P = 0.043), but not age, BMI, or percentage tongue fat. Anisotropic analysis revealed that reduction in stiffness was greatest parallel to the muscle fibers. CPAP had no significant effect on tongue shear modulus. CONCLUSIONS: In awake subjects with obstructive sleep apnea, the tongue is less stiff than in similar healthy subjects and this difference occurs in the muscle fiber direction. CPAP did not significantly reduce tongue stiffness. Thus, any change in neural drive to genioglossus during wakefulness is insufficient to restore normal tongue stiffness.
Authors: Danielle Andrade da Silva Dantas; Thais Mauad; Luiz F F Silva; Geraldo Lorenzi-Filho; Gilberto G S Formigoni; Michel B Cahali Journal: Sleep Date: 2012-04-01 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: Yu-Lun Lo; Amy S Jordan; Atul Malhotra; Andrew Wellman; Raphael C Heinzer; Karen Schory; Louise Dover; Robert B Fogel; David P White Journal: Sleep Date: 2006-04 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: Ianessa A Humbert; Scott B Reeder; Eva J Porcaro; Stephanie A Kays; Jean H Brittain; Joanne Robbins Journal: J Magn Reson Imaging Date: 2008-08 Impact factor: 4.813
Authors: F Sériès; C Côté; J A Simoneau; Y Gélinas; S St Pierre; J Leclerc; R Ferland; I Marc Journal: J Clin Invest Date: 1995-01 Impact factor: 14.808
Authors: Elizabeth C Brown; Shaokoon Cheng; David K McKenzie; Jane E Butler; Simon C Gandevia; Lynne E Bilston Journal: Sleep Date: 2013-07-01 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: Dhananjay Radhakrishnan Subramaniam; Goutham Mylavarapu; Keith McConnell; Robert J Fleck; Sally R Shott; Raouf S Amin; Ephraim J Gutmark Journal: Ann Biomed Eng Date: 2015-08-28 Impact factor: 3.934
Authors: Joshua Tong; Lauriane Jugé; Peter Gr Burke; Fiona Knapman; Danny J Eckert; Lynne E Bilston; Jason Amatoury Journal: J Appl Physiol (1985) Date: 2019-09-12
Authors: Kate Sutherland; Aimee B Lowth; Nick Antic; A Simon Carney; Peter G Catcheside; Ching Li Chai-Coetzer; Michael Chia; John-Charles Hodge; Andrew Jones; Billingsley Kaambwa; Richard Lewis; Stuart MacKay; R Doug McEvoy; Eng H Ooi; Alison J Pinczel; Nigel McArdle; Guy Rees; Bhajan Singh; Nicholas Stow; Edward M Weaver; Richard J Woodman; Charmaine M Woods; Aeneas Yeo; Peter A Cistulli Journal: Sleep Date: 2021-12-10 Impact factor: 6.313