[Endoscopically-assisted adjustment of an oral appliance in patients with obstructive sleep apnoea]

Assessing Orthotic Normalization of Pharyngeal Dynamics

Airway orthotic therapy, considered mainstream in the treatment of sleep-disordered breathing, has been demonstrated to normalize both structure and function of the pathological airway through manipulation of mandibular posture. Although effective, the literature reports a variable rate of success and no validated candidacy selection protocol. Acoustic reflection has been used to evaluate and document the upper airway and its dynamics with and without an orthotic in place. This paper will discuss the use of acoustic reflection to assess the level of airway normalization resulting from protrusive and vertical repositioning of the mandible and its utility to establish orthotic candidacy, construction, titration, and maintenance parameters. This protocol has potential for use in both medical and dental facilities that treat patients with sleep-disordered breathing.

A pilot study of quantitative assessment of mandible advancement using pressure?flow relationship during midazolam sedation

It has been proposed that a titration of the mandibular positioner would be a promising method for predicting the outcome of nasal continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy. This study was carried out to test the hypothesis that mandible advancement could be evaluated by analysis of inspiratory flow limitation using a titration procedure. To explore its effect, we examined upper airway pressure-flow relationships using a titrated mandible positioner during midazolam sedation. Non-flow limited inspiration occurred when the mandible was advanced 7.1 +/- 1.2 mm from centric occlusion position. In the centric occlusion position (0 mm advancement), Pcrit was -1.9 +/- 2.9 cmH2O and Rua was 23.3 +/- 4.5 cmH2O L(-1) s(-1). In the eMAP position, Pcrit was -7.3 +/- 1.9 cmH2O and Rua was 27.8 +/- 3.3 cmH2O L(-1) s(-1). Essentially no CPAP was required to overcome flow limitation in eMAP position, whereas 3.7 +/- 2.2 cmH2O CPAP was required in centric occlusion position. We conclude that assessing inspiratory flow limitation using a titrated mandible positioner was effective for estimating individual-matched mandible positions.