Respiratory outcomes after a 1-year treatment of obstructive sleep apnoea with bibloc versus monobloc oral appliances: a multicentre, randomized equivalence trial

Gender differences in oral appliance treatment of obstructive sleep apnea

PURPOSE

Although overall success rates for treating obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) with an oral appliance (OA) are high, they are significantly higher among females. To verify published data, the study's purpose was to evaluate a participant sample after one year of OA use. The primary outcome was treatment response, with responders defined as having an apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) < 10 at follow-up and/or reduced by ≥50% of baseline. Secondary measures were from standardized questionnaires.

METHODS

A sample of 314 participants, predominately with moderate-to-severe OSA, were enrolled and instructed to use an OA every night. At baseline and one-year follow-up, polygraphic recordings and questionnaires, including sleepiness (measured using the Epworth sleepiness scale) and quality-of-life (measured using the Functional Outcomes of Sleep Questionnaire), were collected.

RESULTS

Among the 314 participants, 192 completed the one-year evaluation: 51 females (27%) and 141 males (73%). Overall, OA treatment resulted in 78% and 77% responders among females and males, respectively. Neither the difference in improvement nor the absolute change in AHI differed significantly based on gender, at any OSA severity level. There were no significant gender differences in sleepiness or quality of life. Treatment-related adverse reactions were more common among females.

CONCLUSION

Both females and males with OSA respond well to OA therapy, with nonsignificant gender differences in outcomes. Thus, the hypothesis that females respond better to OA treatment is rejected.

Evaluation of the efficacy of a custom-made monoblock mandibular advancement device in treatment of obstructive sleep apnea hypopnea syndrome

INTRODUCTION

Mandibular advancement devices (MAD) are an alternative to continuous positive airway pressure for the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea hypopnea syndrome (OSAHS). We aimed to evaluate the efficiency of a custom-made monoblock MAD for the treatment of OSAHS.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We carried out a monocentric retrospective observational study including patients with OSAHS (mild, moderate or severe) or isolated ronchopathy from January 2005 to March 2023. The primary objective was to evaluate the overall efficiency of the MAD assessed by the percentage of patients successfully treated. The secondary objectives included the global efficiency of the device in the treatment of snoring, the report of side effects, and the identification of predictive factors for efficacy or failure.

RESULTS

The medical records of 586 patients were collected, and 293 patients (229 OSAHS and 64 isolated ronchopathy) were included in the analysis. After a mean 2.9 years follow-up, 72.5 % of patients were successfully treated by MAD. We observed a significant improvement in ronchopathy, both in terms of intensity and percentage of time per night. Regarding patients with isolated ronchopathy, 87.5 % reported an improvement in their symptoms and satisfaction with their treatment. Finally, 14.0 % of the patients declared side-effects, the dentoskeletal modifications being the most frequent (6.1 % of the patients).

CONCLUSION

This study confirmed the long-term efficacy and good tolerance of a custom-made monoblock orthosis in OSAHS.

Oral appliance influence on jaw function in obstructive sleep apnea

INTRODUCTION

Oral appliance (OA) therapy in obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) could be a risk factor for normal jaw function, given the prolonged effect of an OA in keeping the mandible in a protruded position away from a normal position. This study aimed to assess changes in symptoms and clinical findings related to jaw function after 1 year of treating OSA with an OA.

METHODS

In this follow-up clinical trial, 302 patients with OSA were assigned to treatment with either monobloc or bibloc OA. Baseline and 1-year follow-up assessment included using the Jaw Functional Limitation Scale, self-reported symptoms and signs related to jaw function. The clinical examination of jaw function included mandibular mobility, dental occlusion, and tenderness in the temporomandibular joints and masticatory muscles. Descriptive analyses of variables are presented for the per-protocol population. To evaluate differences between the baseline and the 1-year follow-up, paired Student t tests and the McNemar change test was used.

RESULTS

One-hundred and ninety-two patients completed the 1-year follow-up (male 73%, mean aged 55 ± 11 years). There was no change in the Jaw Functional Limitation Scale score at the follow-up (nonsignificant). The patients described no change in symptoms at the follow-up, except for improvements in morning headache (P <0.001) and increased frequency of difficulties in opening the mouth or chewing on awakening (P = 0.002). Subjectively reported changes in dental occlusion during biting/chewing increased significantly at the follow-up (P = 0.009).

CONCLUSIONS

No changes in measurements of jaw mobility, dental occlusion, or pain on palpation of the temporomandibular joints or masticatory muscles were seen at the follow-up. Thus, using an OA in treating OSA had limited influence on jaw functions and related symptoms. Moreover, the risk of developing pain and functional impairment in the masticatory system was infrequent, indicating that this treatment is safe and can be recommended.

Comparative efficacy of mandibular advancement devices in obstructive sleep apnea: a network meta-analysis

PURPOSE

To analyze relative efficacies of mandibular advancement devices (MAD) in sleep apnea treatment.

METHODS

From eligible randomized controlled trials (RCT), MADs were classified based on their mechanistic designs. Data on apnea-hypopnea index (AHI), Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS), nadir oxygen saturation (minSaO2), and sleep efficiency (SE%) from RCTs were then analyzed in network meta-analyses, and relative ranking of different MADs was computed based on P scores (a method of ranking similar to SUCRA). Similar analyses were conducted based on the different brands of MADs.

RESULTS

There were no statistically significant differences between MADs in any of the outcomes analyzed. However, the P-scores, based on the point estimates and standard errors of the network estimates, ranked some MADs higher than others in some of the outcomes. Of the different mechanistic designs, the highest P scores were achieved for attached midline traction (P score = 0.84) and unattached bilateral interlocking (P score = 0.78) devices for AHI reduction, attached bilateral traction (P score = 0.78) and unattached bilateral interlocking (P score = 0.76) for ESS, monobloc (P score = 0.91) and unattached bilateral interlocking (P score = 0.64) for minSaO2, and unattached bilateral interlocking (P score = 0.82) and attached bilateral traction (P score = 0.77) for SE%. Notable findings in the network meta-analyses based on MAD brands, of the limited number of studies that specified them were the effects of SomnoDent Flex™, TAP™, and IST® in their effects on AHI reduction, with P scores of 0.94, 0.83, and 0.82, respectively. Monobloc decreased supine-AHI the most (- 44.46 [- 62.55; - 26.36], P score = 0.99), and unattached bilateral interlocking had the greatest effect on REM-AHI (- 11.10 [- 17.10; - 5.10], P score = 0.87).

CONCLUSIONS

Findings from this study show clinically (but not statistically) significant differences between MADs in terms of their relative efficacy when analyzed for different sleep apnea treatment outcomes and sleep apnea phenotypes.

The outcome of oral appliance therapy on position-dependent obstructive sleep apnea: A multicenter randomized controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

This multicenter trial on patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) treated with an oral appliance aimed to determine the effect of sleeping positions.

METHODS

A cohort of 314 patients with OSA were enrolled and evaluated at 8 weeks and 1 year, focusing on treatment effects. At baseline and the 2 follow-ups, new polygraphic registration comparing the proportion of treatment responders without position-dependent OSA (non-position-dependent OSA [non-POSA]) and with POSA was used.

RESULTS

At the 8-week and 1-year follow-up, 205 and 139 patients were included, respectively. The proportion of responders (apnea-hypopnea index [AHI] <10 and/or ≥50% reduction in AHI) was 56% for the non-POSA group and 69% for the POSA group (not significant [NS]). The responders increased at the 1-year follow-up: 68% and 77% for the non-POSA and POSA groups (NS), respectively. The absolute change in AHI in all sleeping positions at 8 weeks was -12.9 (interquartile range, -25.0 to -0.5) in the non-POSA group and -10.5 (interquartile range, -19.9 to -5.3; NS) in the POSA group. However, the decrease in supine AHI was significantly greater among subjects with POSA. In contrast, the decrease in nonsupine AHI was significantly greater in the non-POSA group, an effect that remained at the 1-year follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Our hypothesis that subjects with POSA at baseline would have a higher treatment response rate after oral appliance treatment compared with subjects without POSA was rejected. However, those with POSA had a significantly higher supine AHI decrease, and those without POSA had significantly less nonsupine AHI.

Dropout and adherence of obstructive sleep apnoea patients to mandibular advancement device therapy: A systematic review of randomised controlled trials with meta-analysis and meta-regression

BACKGROUND

Mandibular advancement devices (MADs) are used as an alternative to continuous positive airways pressure to treat obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) patients, but to date, specific data on the adherence to MAD therapy are lacking.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of the present systematic review was to investigate the dropout rate and adherence of OSA patients to different custom-made (CM) and non-custom-made (NCM) MAD therapies.

SEARCH METHODS

An electronic search was performed in MEDLINE, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Scopus, LILACS and Web of Science.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) assessing the compliance to customised and not customised MADs in the treatment of adult OSA patients were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

The quality of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) and the risk of bias by the Cochrane Collaboration's tool for assessing risk of bias in RCT. The dropout rate of each study was computed and the adherence to MAD therapy in terms of hours per night and nights per week was extracted from each study.

RESULTS

Thirty-two RCTs were included. The risk of bias resulted low in most of the studies. The GRADE scores indicated that the quality of evidence was from very low to moderate. The meta-analyses showed that the mean dropout rate did not significantly differ between CM and NCM MADs: The overall mean dropout rate was 0.171 [0.128-0.213] with a mean follow-up of 4.1 months. The hours per night adherence was significantly higher for CM MADs (6.418 [6.033-6.803]) compared to NCM MADs (5.107 [4.324-5.890]. The meta-regression showed that the dropout rate increases significantly during time (p < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

There is a very low to moderate quality of evidence that the dropout rate of MAD therapy is similar among CM and NCM MADs, that the dropout rate increases significantly during time and that CM MADs have higher hours per night adherence compared with NCM MAD.

REGISTRATION

The study protocol was registered on PROSPERO (n. CRD42020199866).