Literature DB >> 34165074

Mandibular advancement device use in obstructive sleep apnea: ORCADES study 5-year follow-up data.

Marie-Françoise Vecchierini1,2, Valérie Attali3,4, Jean-Marc Collet5, Marie-Pia d'Ortho6,7, Frederic Goutorbe8, Jean-Baptiste Kerbrat5,9, Damien Leger1,2, Florent Lavergne10, Christelle Monaca11, Pierre-Jean Monteyrol12, Eric Mullens13, Bernard Pigearias14, Francis Martin3, Hauria Khemliche15, Lionel Lerousseau16, Jean-Claude Meurice17.   

Abstract

STUDY
OBJECTIVES: Mandibular advancement devices (MADs) are an alternative to continuous positive airway pressure for the management of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). The ORthèse d'avanCée mAndibulaire dans le traitement en DEuxième intention du SAHOS sévère (ORCADES) study is investigating the long-term effectiveness of MAD therapy in patients with OSA who refused or were intolerant of continuous positive airway pressure. Five-year follow-up data are presented.
METHODS: Data were available in 172 of 331 patients treated with a custom-made computer-aided design/computer-aided manufacturing biblock MAD (Narval CC; ResMed, Saint-Priest, France). The primary end point was treatment success (≥50% decrease in apnea-hypopnea index from baseline).
RESULTS: Five-year treatment success rates were 52% overall and 25%, 52%, and 63%, respectively, in patients with mild, moderate, or severe OSA. This reflects a decline over time vs 3-6 months (79% overall) and 2 years (68%). Rates declined in all patient subgroups but to the greatest extent in patients with mild OSA. The slight worsening of respiratory parameters over time was not associated with any relevant changes in sleepiness and symptoms. Moderate or severe OSA at baseline, treatment success at 3-6 months, and no previous continuous positive airway pressure use were significant independent predictors of 5-year treatment success on multivariate analysis. No new safety signals emerged during long-term follow-up. The proportion of patients using their MAD for ≥4 h/night on ≥4 days/wk was 93.3%; 91.3% of patients reported device use of ≥6 h/night at 5 years. At 5-year follow-up, 96.5% of patients reported that they wanted to continue MAD therapy.
CONCLUSIONS: Long-term MAD therapy remained effective after 5 years in >50% of patients, with good levels of patient satisfaction and adherence. CITATION: Vecchierini MF, Attali V, Collet JM, et al. Mandibular advancement device use in obstructive sleep apnea: ORCADES study 5-year follow-up data. J Clin Sleep Med. 2021;17(8):1695-1705.
© 2021 American Academy of Sleep Medicine.

Entities:  

Keywords:  adherence; apnea-hypopnea index; mandibular advancement device; obstructive sleep apnea

Mesh:

Year:  2021        PMID: 34165074      PMCID: PMC8656912          DOI: 10.5664/jcsm.9308

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Sleep Med        ISSN: 1550-9389            Impact factor:   4.324


  45 in total

Review 1.  Update on oral appliance therapy.

Authors:  Marie Marklund; Marc J A Braem; Johan Verbraecken
Journal:  Eur Respir Rev       Date:  2019-09-25

2.  The efficacy of oral appliances in the treatment of severe obstructive sleep apnea.

Authors:  Bing Lam; Kim Sam; Jamie C M Lam; Agnes Y K Lai; Chi-Leung Lam; Mary S M Ip
Journal:  Sleep Breath       Date:  2011-02-20       Impact factor: 2.816

3.  Selection of response criteria affects the success rate of oral appliance treatment for obstructive sleep apnea.

Authors:  Tatsuya Fukuda; Satoru Tsuiki; Mina Kobayashi; Hideaki Nakayama; Yuichi Inoue
Journal:  Sleep Med       Date:  2014-01-27       Impact factor: 3.492

4.  The use of oral appliances in obstructive sleep apnea: a retrospective cohort study spanning 14 years of private practice experience.

Authors:  Sylvan S Mintz; Reka Kovacs
Journal:  Sleep Breath       Date:  2018-03-08       Impact factor: 2.816

5.  Factors associated with the efficacy of mandibular advancing device treatment in adult OSA patients.

Authors:  Francesca Milano; Maria Celeste Billi; Francesca Marra; Giovanni Sorrenti; Antonio Gracco; Giulio A Bonetti
Journal:  Int Orthod       Date:  2013-07-15

Review 6.  Oral appliances for snoring and obstructive sleep apnea: a review.

Authors:  Kathleen A Ferguson; Rosalind Cartwright; Robert Rogers; Wolfgang Schmidt-Nowara
Journal:  Sleep       Date:  2006-02       Impact factor: 5.849

7.  Long-term compliance and side effects of oral appliances used for the treatment of snoring and obstructive sleep apnea syndrome.

Authors:  Fernanda Ribeiro de Almeida; Alan A Lowe; Satoru Tsuiki; Ryo Otsuka; Mary Wong; Sandra Fastlicht; Frank Ryan
Journal:  J Clin Sleep Med       Date:  2005-04-15       Impact factor: 4.062

8.  The Effect of mandible advancement splints in mild, moderate, and severe obstructive sleep apnea-the need for sleep registrations during follow up.

Authors:  Tuula Palotie; Siru Riekki; Antti Mäkitie; Adel Bachour; Sirpa Arte; Leif Bäck
Journal:  Eur J Orthod       Date:  2017-10-01       Impact factor: 3.075

9.  Long-term therapeutic efficacy of oral appliances in treatment of obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea syndrome.

Authors:  Xu Gong; Jingjing Zhang; Ying Zhao; Xuemei Gao
Journal:  Angle Orthod       Date:  2012-12-27       Impact factor: 2.079

10.  Objective measurement of compliance during oral appliance therapy for sleep-disordered breathing.

Authors:  Olivier M Vanderveken; Marijke Dieltjens; Kristien Wouters; Wilfried A De Backer; Paul H Van de Heyning; Marc J Braem
Journal:  Thorax       Date:  2012-09-19       Impact factor: 9.139

View more
  3 in total

Review 1.  Current and novel treatment options for obstructive sleep apnoea.

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

2.  Is it the time to expect long-term outcome data in addition to follow-up data for sleep apnea interventions?

Authors:  Mahadevappa Hunasikatti
Journal:  J Clin Sleep Med       Date:  2021-08-01       Impact factor: 4.324

Review 3.  Obstructive sleep apnea therapy for cardiovascular risk reduction-Time for a rethink?

Authors:  Hasthi U Dissanayake; Juliana T Colpani; Kate Sutherland; Weiqiang Loke; Anna Mohammadieh; Yi-Hui Ou; Philip de Chazal; Peter A Cistulli; Chi-Hang Lee
Journal:  Clin Cardiol       Date:  2021-11-17       Impact factor: 2.882

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.