Kate Sutherland1,2, Joachim Ngiam1, Peter A Cistulli1,2. 1. Centre for Sleep Health and Research, Department of Respiratory and Sleep Medicine, Royal North Shore Hospital, Northern Sydney Local Health District. 2. Northern Clinical School, Sydney Medical School, University of Sydney.
Abstract
STUDY OBJECTIVES: Mandibular protrusion during sleep monitoring has been proposed as a method to predict oral appliance treatment outcome. A commercial remotely controlled mandibular protrusion (RCMP) device has become available for this purpose with predictive accuracy demonstrated in an initial study. Our aim was to validate this RCMP method for oral appliance treatment outcome prediction in a clinical sleep laboratory setting. METHODS: Forty-two obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) patients (apnea-hypopnea index [AHI] > 10 events/h) were recruited to undergo a RCMP sleep study before commencing oral appliance treatment. The RCMP study was used to make a prediction of treatment "Success" or "Failure" based on a rule of ≤ 1 respiratory event per 5 min supine rapid eye movement sleep. Oral appliance treatment response was verified by polysomonography and defined as treatment AHI < 10 events/h with 50% reduction. RESULTS: Participants were on average middle-aged (57.1 ± 11.6 y) and overweight (29.6 ± 4.5 kg/m2) with baseline AHI 31.5 ± 20.5 events/h, 39% severe OSA (AHI > 30 events/h). Two participants (5%) were not able to tolerate the RCMP study. Oral appliance treatment outcome was verified in 33 participants (RCMP results: "Success" n = 10, "Failure" n = 15, "Inconclusive" n = 8). In those with a treatment outcome prediction (n = 25) the diagnostic characteristics of the RCMP test were sensitivity 81.8%, specificity 92.9%, positive predictive value 90%, and negative predictive value 86.7% (n = 3 misclassified). CONCLUSIONS: The RCMP device was well tolerated by patients and successfully used to perform mandibular protrusion sleep studies in our sleep laboratory. The RCMP sleep study showed good accuracy as a prediction technique for oral appliance treatment outcome, although there was a high rate of inconclusive tests.
STUDY OBJECTIVES: Mandibular protrusion during sleep monitoring has been proposed as a method to predict oral appliance treatment outcome. A commercial remotely controlled mandibular protrusion (RCMP) device has become available for this purpose with predictive accuracy demonstrated in an initial study. Our aim was to validate this RCMP method for oral appliance treatment outcome prediction in a clinical sleep laboratory setting. METHODS: Forty-two obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) patients (apnea-hypopnea index [AHI] > 10 events/h) were recruited to undergo a RCMP sleep study before commencing oral appliance treatment. The RCMP study was used to make a prediction of treatment "Success" or "Failure" based on a rule of ≤ 1 respiratory event per 5 min supine rapid eye movement sleep. Oral appliance treatment response was verified by polysomonography and defined as treatment AHI < 10 events/h with 50% reduction. RESULTS:Participants were on average middle-aged (57.1 ± 11.6 y) and overweight (29.6 ± 4.5 kg/m2) with baseline AHI 31.5 ± 20.5 events/h, 39% severe OSA (AHI > 30 events/h). Two participants (5%) were not able to tolerate the RCMP study. Oral appliance treatment outcome was verified in 33 participants (RCMP results: "Success" n = 10, "Failure" n = 15, "Inconclusive" n = 8). In those with a treatment outcome prediction (n = 25) the diagnostic characteristics of the RCMP test were sensitivity 81.8%, specificity 92.9%, positive predictive value 90%, and negative predictive value 86.7% (n = 3 misclassified). CONCLUSIONS: The RCMP device was well tolerated by patients and successfully used to perform mandibular protrusion sleep studies in our sleep laboratory. The RCMP sleep study showed good accuracy as a prediction technique for oral appliance treatment outcome, although there was a high rate of inconclusive tests.
Authors: Kentaro Okuno; Yasuhiro Sasao; Kanji Nohara; Takayoshi Sakai; Benjamin T Pliska; Alan A Lowe; C Frank Ryan; Fernanda R Almeida Journal: Eur Respir J Date: 2016-01-07 Impact factor: 16.671
Authors: Clete A Kushida; Alejandro Chediak; Richard B Berry; Lee K Brown; David Gozal; Conrad Iber; Sairam Parthasarathy; Stuart F Quan; James A Rowley Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2008-04-15 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: Kate Sutherland; Olivier M Vanderveken; Hiroko Tsuda; Marie Marklund; Frederic Gagnadoux; Clete A Kushida; Peter A Cistulli Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2014-02-15 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: Alex Sassani; Larry J Findley; Meir Kryger; Eric Goldlust; Charles George; Terence M Davidson Journal: Sleep Date: 2004-05-01 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: Chloé Kastoer; Marijke Dieltjens; Sara Op de Beeck; Marc J Braem; Paul H Van de Heyning; Olivier M Vanderveken Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2018-08-15 Impact factor: 4.062
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: Kate Sutherland; Andrew S L Chan; Joachim Ngiam; Oyku Dalci; M Ali Darendeliler; Peter A Cistulli Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2018-11-15 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: Ahmad A Bamagoos; Peter A Cistulli; Kate Sutherland; Melanie Madronio; Danny J Eckert; Lauren Hess; Bradley A Edwards; Andrew Wellman; Scott A Sands Journal: Ann Am Thorac Soc Date: 2019-11
Authors: Samar Adel; Abbas Zaher; Nadia El Harouni; Adith Venugopal; Pratik Premjani; Nikhilesh Vaid Journal: Biomed Res Int Date: 2021-06-16 Impact factor: 3.411