Cargando…

Comparisons of the effects of two types of titratable mandibular advancement devices on respiratory parameters and upper airway dimensions in patients with obstructive sleep apnea: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of two types of titratable mandibular advancement devices (MADs), namely MAD-H (allowing limited vertical opening) and MAD-S (allowing free vertical opening), on respiratory parameters and upper airway dimensions in patients with mild to moderate obstructive sleep...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Shi, Xiaoxin, Lobbezoo, Frank, Chen, Hui, Rosenmöller, Boudewijn R. A. M., Berkhout, Erwin, de Lange, Jan, Aarab, Ghizlane
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2023
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10160211/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36928350
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00784-023-04945-z
Descripción
Sumario:OBJECTIVES: To compare the effects of two types of titratable mandibular advancement devices (MADs), namely MAD-H (allowing limited vertical opening) and MAD-S (allowing free vertical opening), on respiratory parameters and upper airway dimensions in patients with mild to moderate obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients with mild to moderate OSA (5 ≤ apnea–hypopnea index (AHI) < 30 /h) were randomly assigned to two parallel MAD groups. All MADs were subjectively titrated according to a standardized protocol during a 3-month follow-up. Every patient underwent two polysomnographic recordings, and two cone beam computed tomography scans in supine position: one at baseline and another one after 3 months with the MAD in situ. The primary outcome variables were the AHI in supine position (AHI-supine) and the minimal cross-sectional area of the upper airway in supine position (CSAmin-supine). RESULTS: A total of 49 patients were recruited, and 31 patients (21 men and 10 women) with a mean (± SD) age of 48.5 (± 13.9) years and a mean AHI of 16.6 (± 6.7) /h completed the study. In the per-protocol analysis, there was no significant difference between MAD-H (n = 16) and MAD-S (n = 15) in their effects on AHI-supine (P = 0.14) and CSAmin-supine (P = 0.59). Similar results were found in the intention-to-treat analysis (P = 0.47 and 0.57, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Within the limitations of this study, we conclude that there is no significant difference in the effects of an MAD allowing limited vertical opening and an MAD allowing free vertical opening on respiratory parameters and upper airway dimensions in patients with mild to moderate OSA. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: MADs allowing limited vertical opening and allowing free vertical opening have similar effects on respiratory parameters and upper airway dimensions in patients with mild to moderate OSA. Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02724865. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02724865