Sara Op de Beeck1,2,3, Marijke Dieltjens1,3,4, Ali Azarbarzin5, Marc Willemen2, Johan Verbraecken1,2,6, Marc J Braem1,4, Andrew Wellman5, Scott A Sands5, Olivier M Vanderveken1,2,3. 1. Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, University of Antwerp, Wilrijk, Belgium. 2. Multidisciplinary Sleep Disorders Center. 3. Ear, Nose and Throat, Head and Neck Surgery. 4. Special Dentistry Care, and. 5. Division of Sleep and Circadian Disorders, Brigham and Women's Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts. 6. Department of Pulmonology, Antwerp University Hospital, Edegem, Belgium; and.
Abstract
Rationale: Mandibular advancement device (MAD) treatment efficacy varies among patients with obstructive sleep apnea. Objectives: The current study aims to explain underlying individual differences in efficacy using obstructive sleep apnea endotypic traits calculated from baseline clinical polysomnography: collapsibility (airflow at normal ventilatory drive), loop gain (drive response to reduced airflow), arousal threshold (drive preceding arousal), compensation (increase in airflow as drive increases), and the ventilatory response to arousal (increase in drive explained by arousal). On the basis of previous research, we hypothesized that responders to MAD treatment have a lower loop gain and milder collapsibility. Methods: Thirty-six patients (median apnea-hypopnea index [AHI], 23.5 [interquartile range (IQR), 19.7-29.8] events/h) underwent baseline and 3-month follow-up full polysomnography, with MAD fixed at 75% of maximal protrusion. Traits were estimated using baseline polysomnography according to Sands and colleagues. Response was defined as an AHI reduction ≥ 50%. Results: MAD treatment significantly reduced AHI (49.7%baseline [23.9-63.6], median [IQR]). Responders exhibited lower loop gain (mean [95% confidence interval], 0.53 [0.48-0.58] vs. 0.65 [0.57-0.73]; P = 0.020) at baseline than nonresponders, a difference that persisted after adjustment for baseline AHI and body mass index. Elevated loop gain remained associated with nonresponse after adjustment for collapsibility (odds ratio, 3.03 [1.16-7.88] per 1-standard deviation (SD) increase in loop gain [SD, 0.15]; P = 0.023).Conclusions: MAD nonresponders exhibit greater ventilatory instability, expressed as higher loop gain. Assessment of the baseline degree of ventilatory instability using this approach may improve upfront MAD treatment patient selection.Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01532050).
Rationale: Mandibular advancement device (MAD) treatment efficacy varies among patients with obstructive sleep apnea. Objectives: The current study aims to explain underlying individual differences in efficacy using obstructive sleep apnea endotypic traits calculated from baseline clinical polysomnography: collapsibility (airflow at normal ventilatory drive), loop gain (drive response to reduced airflow), arousal threshold (drive preceding arousal), compensation (increase in airflow as drive increases), and the ventilatory response to arousal (increase in drive explained by arousal). On the basis of previous research, we hypothesized that responders to MAD treatment have a lower loop gain and milder collapsibility. Methods: Thirty-six patients (median apnea-hypopnea index [AHI], 23.5 [interquartile range (IQR), 19.7-29.8] events/h) underwent baseline and 3-month follow-up full polysomnography, with MAD fixed at 75% of maximal protrusion. Traits were estimated using baseline polysomnography according to Sands and colleagues. Response was defined as an AHI reduction ≥ 50%. Results: MAD treatment significantly reduced AHI (49.7%baseline [23.9-63.6], median [IQR]). Responders exhibited lower loop gain (mean [95% confidence interval], 0.53 [0.48-0.58] vs. 0.65 [0.57-0.73]; P = 0.020) at baseline than nonresponders, a difference that persisted after adjustment for baseline AHI and body mass index. Elevated loop gain remained associated with nonresponse after adjustment for collapsibility (odds ratio, 3.03 [1.16-7.88] per 1-standard deviation (SD) increase in loop gain [SD, 0.15]; P = 0.023).Conclusions: MAD nonresponders exhibit greater ventilatory instability, expressed as higher loop gain. Assessment of the baseline degree of ventilatory instability using this approach may improve upfront MAD treatment patient selection.Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01532050).
Entities:
Keywords:
MAD; OSA; obstructive sleep apnea; pathophysiology; personalized medicine
Authors: A S L Chan; R W W Lee; V K Srinivasan; M A Darendeliler; R R Grunstein; P A Cistulli Journal: Eur Respir J Date: 2009-09-24 Impact factor: 16.671
Authors: Andrew Wellman; Danny J Eckert; Amy S Jordan; Bradley A Edwards; Chris L Passaglia; Andrew C Jackson; Shiva Gautam; Robert L Owens; Atul Malhotra; David P White Journal: J Appl Physiol (1985) Date: 2011-03-24
Authors: Ali Azarbarzin; Scott A Sands; Melania Marques; Pedro R Genta; Luigi Taranto-Montemurro; Ludovico Messineo; David P White; Andrew Wellman Journal: Eur Respir J Date: 2018-02-14 Impact factor: 16.671
Authors: Bradley A Edwards; Christopher Andara; Shane Landry; Scott A Sands; Simon A Joosten; Robert L Owens; David P White; Garun S Hamilton; Andrew Wellman Journal: Am J Respir Crit Care Med Date: 2016-12-01 Impact factor: 21.405
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: Ali Azarbarzin; Scott A Sands; Luigi Taranto-Montemurro; Melania D Oliveira Marques; Pedro R Genta; Bradley A Edwards; James Butler; David P White; Andrew Wellman Journal: Sleep Date: 2017-01-01 Impact factor: 5.849
Authors: Winfried Randerath; Jan de Lange; Jan Hedner; Jean Pierre T F Ho; Marie Marklund; Sofia Schiza; Jörg Steier; Johan Verbraecken Journal: ERJ Open Res Date: 2022-06-27
Authors: Daniel Vena; Luigi Taranto-Montemurro; Ali Azarbarzin; Sara Op de Beeck; Melania Marques; Olivier M Vanderveken; Bradley A Edwards; Laura Gell; Nicole Calianese; Lauren B Hess; Reza Radmand; Garun S Hamilton; Simon A Joosten; Johan Verbraecken; Marc Braem; David P White; Susan Redline; Scott A Sands; Andrew Wellman Journal: Sleep Date: 2022-06-13 Impact factor: 6.313
Authors: Ning Zhou; Jean-Pierre T F Ho; Wouter P Visscher; Naichuan Su; Frank Lobbezoo; Jan de Lange Journal: Sleep Breath Date: 2022-10-22 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Hélène Van Gaver; Sara Op de Beeck; Marijke Dieltjens; Jan De Backer; Johan Verbraecken; Wilfried A De Backer; Paul H Van de Heyning; Marc J Braem; Olivier M Vanderveken Journal: J Clin Sleep Med Date: 2022-03-01 Impact factor: 4.062
Authors: Francesco Gambino; Marta Maria Zammuto; Alessandro Virzì; Giosafat Conti; Maria Rosaria Bonsignore Journal: Intern Emerg Med Date: 2022-04-23 Impact factor: 5.472
Authors: Ai-Ming Wong; Shane A Landry; Simon A Joosten; Luke D J Thomson; Anthony Turton; Jeremy Stonehouse; Darren R Mansfield; Glen Burgess; Andrew Hays; Scott A Sands; Christopher Andara; Caroline J Beatty; Garun S Hamilton; Bradley A Edwards Journal: Respirology Date: 2022-05-21 Impact factor: 6.175
Authors: Elahe Kazemeini; Eli Van de Perck; Marijke Dieltjens; Marc Willemen; Johan Verbraecken; Sara Op de Beeck; Olivier M Vanderveken Journal: Front Neurol Date: 2022-02-22 Impact factor: 4.003