Effects of sleep position on the treatment response of oral appliance for obstructive sleep apnea

Preferences and experiences regarding the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea with mandibular advancement splints - a cross-sectional pilot survey

OBJECTIVE

To obtain a current overview of the use of mandibular advancement splints (MAS) as a therapeutic option for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in the dental profession in Northern Germany.

METHODS

A questionnaire was mailed to 2431 dental professionals, and 8.3% responded. Descriptive data analysis was performed on each question separately.

RESULTS

Most of the surveyed dentists (51.7%) estimated the success rate of MAS therapy to be higher than 75%. Analysis of the relationship between the number of splints prescribed annually and the dental specialization (p = 0.22), work experience (p = 0.14), estimated success rate of MAS therapy (p = 0.96), and discontinuation of MAS therapy (p = 0.57) revealed no significant correlations.

CONCLUSION

Mandibular advancement splints seem to be a safe and successful therapy for OSA. There seems to be a lack of information on the patient side and a lack of education on the dentist side.

Effects of the combination of novel eye mask sleep position therapy device and oral appliance on positional OSA: A multi-arm, parallel-group randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

We explored whether a new combination of eye mask sleep position therapy (SPT) and oral appliance therapy (OAT) was more effective at treating positional obstructive sleep apnea (POSA) than was the use of either device alone.

METHODS

In this randomized controlled trial, 60 POSA subjects diagnosed by standard polysomnography (PSG) were divided into three groups (ratio 1:1:1): SPT, OAT, and SPT combined with OAT (SOT). Participants underwent hospital-based follow-ups during months 1 and 6 after beginning treatment. The primary outcome was the decline in the apnea hypopnea index (AHI) at month 6. The secondary outcomes were changes in oxygen-derived parameters and the curative effect at month 6.

RESULTS

After 6 months of treatment, PSG showed that SPT, OAT, and SOT all improved the AHI and oxygen-derived parameters. The AHI decline was significantly better in the SOT group than in the OAT or SPT group (71.58% [50.56-84.84%] for SOT, 44.42% [21.23-67.52%] for OAT, and 33.24% [19.03-54.62%] for SPT at 6 months) (P = 0.018 and P < 0.001 for the comparisons of SOT with OAT and SOT with SPT, respectively). In terms of oxygen-derived parameters, only the sleep apnea-specific hypoxic burden (SASHB) improved more in the SOT group (76.89% [57.43-85.91%]) than in the other groups (44.73% [32.38-72.69%] for OAT and 41.82% [15.40-65.24%] for SPT, P = 0.002 and P < 0.001 for the comparisons of SOT with OAT and SOT with SPT, respectively). The efficacies of SPT, OAT, and SOT were 36.84%, 50%, and 80% at 6 months; the SOT group evidenced the highest value (rate ratio [95% confidence interval] 1.78 (1.05-3.03), P = 0.048 and 2.17 (1.16-4.07), P = 0.010, for the comparisons of SOT with OAT and SOT with SPT, respectively).

CONCLUSION

The combination of SPT and OAT was better than either treatment alone and may represent a good option for the treatment of POSA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry; URL: http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=42,852; No. ChiCTR1900025584.

Semi-fixed versus fixed oral appliance therapy for obstructive sleep apnea: A randomized crossover pilot study

Background/purpose

Although mandibular advancement oral appliances (OAs) are the most widely used and accepted therapeutic modality for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), whether these maxillary and mandibular appliances should be semi-fixed or fixed remains uncertain. This randomized crossover pilot study compared the efficacy, side effects, and patient preference of semi-fixed and fixed OAs for the treatment of OSA.

Materials and methods

Patients with mild to moderate OSA were recruited and randomly assigned to either the semi-fixed or fixed OA group, whereby they used their assigned OA for the first 4 weeks, followed by assessments for sleep parameters (including the Apnea-Hypopnea Index [AHI]) and temporomandibular joint pain as a side effect. After a two-week washout period, patients were switched to the alternative OA for 4 weeks, followed by repeated assessments. Patient preference was assessed at the end of the completed treatment period.

Results

Fifteen patients were enrolled and completed the full study protocol. Both types of OAs were efficient in reducing the patient's AHI in comparison to baseline (i.e., without OA). However, there was no significant difference in AHI reduction between the semi-fixed and fixed OA devices. Regarding the side effect of temporomandibular joint pain and patient preference, the semi-fixed OA device was superior to the fixed OA device on both measures.

Conclusion

While both semi-fixed and fixed OAs are effective in treating patients with OSA, semi-fixed OAs are superior in regards to both patient preference and reduced side effects. Thus, semi-fixed OAs may be the preferred therapeutic modality for OSA.