Quality Assessment of Systematic Reviews on the Efficacy of Oral Appliance Therapy for Adult and Pediatric Sleep-Disordered Breathing

Using the forest plot to compare citation achievements in bibliographic and meta-analysis studies since 2011 using data on PubMed Central: A retrospective study

BACKGROUND

We saw a steady increase in the number of bibliographic studies published over the years. The reason for this rise is attributed to the better accessibility of bibliographic data and software packages that specialize in bibliographic analyses. Any difference in citation achievements between bibliographic and meta-analysis studies observed so far need to be verified. In this study, we aimed to identify the frequently observed MeSH terms in these 2 types of study and investigate whether the highlighted MeSH terms are strongly associated with one of the study types.

METHODS

By searching the PubMed Central database, 5121 articles relevant to bibliometric and meta-analysis studies were downloaded since 2011. Social network analysis was applied to highlight the major MeSH terms of quantitative and statistical methods in these 2 types of studies. MeSH terms were then individually tested for any differences in event counts over the years between study types using odds of 95% confidence intervals for comparison.

RESULTS

In these 2 studies, we found that the most productive countries were the United States (19.9%), followed by the United Kingdom (8.8%) and China (8.7%); the most number of articles were published in PLoS One (2.9%), Stat Med (2.5%), and Res Synth (2.4%); and the most frequently observed MeSH terms were statistics and numerical data in bibliographic studies and methods in meta-analysis. Differences were found when compared to the event counts and the citation achievements in these 2 study types.

CONCLUSION

The breakthrough was made by developing a dashboard using forest plots to display the difference in event counts. The visualization of the observed MeSH terms could be replicated for future academic pursuits and applications in other disciplines using the odds of 95% confidence intervals.

Effectiveness of functional orthodontic appliances in obstructive sleep apnea treatment in children: literature review

Introduction

Obstructive sleep apnea syndrome is a common condition in childhood and if left untreated can result in many health problems. An accurate diagnosis of the etiology is crucial for obstructive sleep apnea treatment success. Functional orthodontic appliances that stimulate mandibular growth by forward mandibular positioning are an alternative therapeutic option in growing patients.

Objective

To perform a literature review about the effects of functional orthodontic appliances used to correct the mandibular deficiency in obstructive sleep apnea treatment.

Methods

The literature search was conducted in June 2020 using Cochrane Library; PubMed, EBSCO (Dentistry & Oral Sciences Source), LILACS Ovid; SciELO Web of Science; EMBASE Bireme and BBO Bireme electronic databases. The search included papers published in English, until June 2020, whose methodology referred to the types and effects of functional orthopedic appliances on obstructive sleep apnea treatment in children.

Results

The search strategy identified thirteen articles; only four articles were randomized clinical studies. All studies using the oral appliances or functional orthopedic appliances for obstructive sleep apnea in children resulted in improvements in the apnea-hypopnea index score. The cephalometric (2D) and tomographic (3D) evaluations revealed enlargement of the upper airway and increase in the upper airspace, improving the respiratory function in the short term.

Conclusion

Functional appliances may be an alternative treatment for obstructive sleep apnea, but it cannot be concluded that they are effective in treating pediatric obstructive sleep apnea. There are significant deficiencies in the existing evidence, mainly due to absence of control groups, small sample sizes, lack of randomization and no long-term results.

The effectiveness of mandibular advancement devices in the treatment of obstructive sleep apnoea in adults: a methodological quality assessment of systematic reviews

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

There is growing interest in the use of mandibular advancement devices (MADs) for the treatment of obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA). Many systematic reviews (SRs) have investigated their effectiveness, but the applicability of SR results is affected by their methodological quality. This study critically appraises the methodological quality of SRs on this topic using a more detailed and updated version of A MeaSurement Tool to Assess systematic Reviews (AMSTAR).

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The literature was searched for SRs on MAD effectiveness in adults (≥18 years of age) for OSA treatment as compared with other non-surgical or surgical interventions or no intervention. Any objective or subjective measures of treatment outcome were considered eligible. AMSTAR2 was used to assess methodological quality.

RESULTS

The literature search yielded 64 potential reports; 10 met the eligibility criteria. All SRs had more than one critical flaw in AMSTAR2, so their methodological quality was rated as critically low. The most common issues included non-registration of study protocol, absence of list of excluded studies, no acknowledgment of fundings of included studies, no impact of risk of bias on SR results or interpretation and discussion of results, and data extraction not in duplicate.

LIMITATIONS

If a SR was not clearly identified by title or abstract as a SR or meta-analysis, it may have been missed during the screening process.

CONCLUSIONS

The methodological quality of SRs was suboptimal and warrants further improvement in order to provide strong evidence of MAD effectiveness and increase applicability of SR results for clinical decision-making.

Review of systematic reviews on mandibular advancement oral appliance for obstructive sleep apnea: The importance of long-term follow-up

The purpose of this review was to present the currently available information on oral appliance (OA) therapy for dentists, especially clinic-based dentists, to aid them in performing this treatment for the management of symptoms of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). The clinical research evidence comprised of systematic reviews concerned with the mandibular advancement oral appliance (OAm). Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) is superior to OA therapy in improving OSA symptoms. It is necessary to survey the adherence of patients who stopped CPAP therapy to OAm therapy. There is little evidence supporting the theory that OAm therapy prevents cardiovascular disease or improves prognosis. There is still room to investigate the types of OAm. OAm therapy has clear dental and skeletal side effects with long-term use, and these are important for dentists. However, a certain percentage of patients discontinue consultations. Regarding consultation rate for follow-up and repair/adjustments of OAm, there are advantages for the clinic-based dentists treating OSA with OAm. We believe that enhancing under-graduate and post-graduate education on sleep medicine, and establishing a specialist system could be the strategies for enabling the dentists to handle OAm therapy in dental clinics.

Efficacy of a mandibular advancement intraoral appliance (MOA) for the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) in pediatric patients: A pilot-study

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the treatment efficacy of a mandibular advancement intraoral appliance (MOA) for treatment of obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) in pediatric patients.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Eighteen patients (mean=8.39 years old, women=44.4%) were selected. Sleep disorders, sleep bruxism, and temporomandibular disorders were assessed by the Sleep Disturbance Scale for Children (SDSC), the BiteStrip® (portable SB device), and the Research Diagnostic Criteria for Temporomandibular Disorders, respectively. The clinical diagnosis of OSAS was confirmed with a type 3 portable monitor device (ApneaLinkTM Plus). A silicon-based material MOA was used by patients for 60 days, and the results were compared to baseline.

RESULTS

The median RDI was significantly reduced from 10 to 4.5 events/hour. Nadir SpO2 significantly increased from 82.6% to 88.9%. Total snoring events/hour have also significantly decreased from 205.5 to 91.5. Signs and symptoms of TMD remained unaltered. There was also a reduction from moderate to absence of SB in 12 patients. Similarly, all variables measured by the SDSC have had very significant reductions: disorders of initiating and maintaining sleep, sleep disordered breathing, disorders of arousal, nightmares, sleep wake transition disorders, disorders of excessive somnolence, and sleep hyperhidrosis.

CONCLUSIONS

In selected cases, OA maybe considered as an alternative for the OSAS treatment.

Utility of intraoral stents in external beam radiotherapy for head and neck cancer

AIM

This study aimed to assess the utility and stability of intraoral stent during intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT).

BACKGROUND

The benefits of intraoral stents in radiotherapy are unclear.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We analyzed 386 setup errors in 12 patients who received IMRT for head and neck cancers without intraoral stents (intraoral stent [-]) and 183 setup errors in 6 patients who received IMRT with intraoral stents (intraoral stent [+]). All patients were matched according to the immobilization method (masks and boards). Setup errors were measured as the distance from the initial setup based on the marking on the skin and mask to the corrected position based on bone matching on cone beam computed tomography.

RESULTS

The mean interfractional setup errors in the right-left, craniocaudal, anterior-posterior (AP), and three-dimensional (3D) directions were -0.33, 0.08, -0.25, and 2.75 mm in the intraoral stent (-) group and -0.37, 0.24, -0.63, and 2.42 mm in the intraoral stent (+) group, respectively (P = 0.50, 0.65, 0.01, and 0.02, respectively). The systematic errors for the same directions were 0.89, 1.46, 1.15, and 0.88 mm in the intraoral stent (-) group and 0.62, 1.69, 0.68, and 0.56 mm in the intraoral stents (+) group, respectively. The random errors were 1.43, 1.43, 1.44, and 1.22 mm in the intraoral stent (-) group and 1.06, 1.11, 1.05, and 0.92 mm in the intraoral stents (+) group, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Setup errors can be significantly reduced in the AP and 3D-directions by using intraoral stents.