Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The use of oral appliances in obstructive sleep apnea: a retrospective cohort study spanning 14 years of private practice experience

  • Dentistry • Original Article
  • Published:
Sleep and Breathing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

In 2005, the American Academy of Sleep Medicine stated, “Oral appliances are indicated for use in patients with mild to moderate obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) who prefer them to CPAP therapy, or who do not respond to, are not appropriate candidates for, or who fail treatment attempts with CPAP.” However, this recommendation is based upon variable results from only six studies with more than 100 participants. These studies have assessed the effectiveness of mandibular advancement devices (MADs) in specific groups (military populations, academic institutions, or hospital settings) with no large study conducted in a fee-for-service private practice where the majority of patients receive MADs for OSA. The purpose of this study is to report outcomes of a board-certified dental sleep practitioner managing mild, moderate, and severe OSA using customized titratable MADs. We hypothesize that patients will demonstrate a significant reduction in apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) scores after adjusting their customized titratable MADs.

Methods

This is a 14-year retrospective study design with pre- and post-treatment sleep studies. An AHI score < 10 respiratory events per hour with therapy is defined as treatment success. This study was performed by a single private practitioner.

Results

Of 2419 patient records analyzed, 544 (22%) had pre- and post-treatment sleep studies (89% polysomnograms). Of 510 patients with complete data, 459 (90%) revealed a decrease in AHI score < 10 respiratory events per hour indicating treatment success.

Only 51 of these patients (10%) had a final AHI ≥ 10 and were considered treatment failures. Among the patients who lacked post overnight polysomnogram, 66/1921 (3%) discontinued the MAD due to adverse effects. Considering these patients as treatment failures as well, and therefore adding their number to the patients with complete sleep study data, the total treatment failures were 117/576 or 20%. Of the treatment successes, OSA was categorized by AHI at baseline as mild in 170 (34%), moderate in 181 (36%), and severe in 138 (28%).

Conclusions

In patients with evaluable data, there was an 80% success rate for treatment of OSA using a custom-fabricated adjustable MAD including substantial numbers of patients with moderate and severe disease.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. “Asthma at a Glance,” National Center for Environmental Health (NCEH), U.S. CDC, 1999

  2. CDC (2011) National diabetes fact sheet: national estimates and general information on diabetes and prediabetes in the United States, 2011. US Department of Health and Human Services, CDC, Atlanta

    Google Scholar 

  3. Young T, Finn L, Peppard PE, Szklo-Coxe M, Austin D, Nieto FJ, Stubbs R, Hla KM (2008) Sleep disordered breathing and mortality: eighteen-year follow-up of the Wisconsin sleep cohort. Sleep 31:1071–1078

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  4. Young T (2009) Rationale, design and findings from the Wisconsin Sleep Cohort Study: toward understanding the total societal burden of sleep disordered breathing. Sleep Med Clin 49:37–46

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Marin JM, Agusti A, Villar I, Forner M, Nieto D, Carrizo SJ, Barbé F, Vicente E, Wei Y, Nieto FJ, Jelic S (2012) Association between treated and untreated obstructive sleep apnea and risk of hypertension. JAMA 307(20):2169–2176

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  6. Maher K, The new face of sleep. NY Times, February1,2010

  7. Matson S, Sree R First Quarter 2016 Sleep center survey results, Sleep Review Magazine, May 2, 2016

  8. Ferguson KA, Ono T, Lowe AA, Keenan SP, Fleetham JA (1996) A randomized crossover study of an oral appliance vs nasal-continuous positive airway pressure in the treatment of mild-moderate obstructive sleep apnea. Chest 109(5):1269–1275

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Hofstein V (2007) Review of oral appliances for treatment of sleep-disordered breathing. Sleep Breath 11:1–22

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Chan AS, Sutherland K, Schwab RJ, Zeng B, Petocz P, Lee RW, Darendeliler MA, Cistulli PA (2010) The effect of mandibular advancement on upper airway structure in obstructive sleep apnoea. Thorax 65:726–732

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Kushida CA, Morgenthaler TI, Littner MR, Alessi CA, Bailey D, Jr CJ, Friedman L, Hirshkowitz M, Kapen S, Kramer M, Lee-Chiong T, Owens J, Pancer JP (2006) Practice parameters for the treatment of snoring and obstructive sleep apnea with oral appliances: an update for 2005. Sleep 29(2):240–243

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Gagnadoux F, Fleury B, Vielle B, Pételle B, Meslier N, N’Guyen XL, Trzepizur W, Racineux JL (2009) Titrated mandibular advancement versus positive airway pressure for sleep apnoea. Eur Respir J 34:914–920

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Kim JH, Kwon MS, Song HM, Lee BJ, Jang YJ, Chung YS (2009) Compliance with positive airway pressure treatment for obstructive sleep apnea. Clin Exp Otorhinolaryngol 2:90–96

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  14. Young T (2013) Don’t start celebrating—CPAP adherence is still a problem. J Clin Sleep Med 9(6):552

    Google Scholar 

  15. Phillips CL, Grunstein RR, Darendeliler MA, Mihailidou AS, Srinivasan VK, Yee BJ, Marks GB, Cistulli PA (2013) Health outcomes of continuous positive airway pressure versus oral appliance treatment for obstructive sleep apnea: a randomized controlled trial. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 187(8):879–887

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Li W, Xiao L, Hu J (2013) The comparison of CPAP and oral appliances in treatment of patients with OSA: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Respir Care 58(7):1184–1195

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Yoshida K (2000) Effects of a mandibular advancement device for the treatment of sleep apnea syndrome and snoring on respiratory function and sleep quality. Cranio 18(2):98–105

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Marklund M, Stenlund H, Franklin KA (2004) Mandibular advancement devices in 630 men and women with obstructive sleep apnea and snoring tolerability and predictors of treatment success. Chest 125(4):1270–1278

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Holley AB, Lettieri CJ, Shah AA (2011) Adjustable oral appliance and comparison with continuous positive airway pressure for the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea syndrome. Chest 140(6):1511–1516

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  20. Lam B, Sam K, Mok WY, Cheung MT, Fong DY, Lam JC, Lam DC, Yam LY, Ip MS (2007) Randomized study of three non-surgical treatment in mild to moderate obstructive sleep apnea. Thorax 62(4):354–359

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Friedman M, Hamilton C, Samuelson CG, Kelley K, Pearson-Chauhan K, Taylor D, Taylor R, Maley A, Hirsch MA (2012) Compliance and efficacy of thermoplastic versus custom mandibular advancement devices. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 147(2):379–386

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Lettieri CJ, Paolino N, Eliasson AH, Shah AA, Holley AB (2011) Comparison of adjustable and fixed oral appliances for the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea (2011). J Clin Sleep Med 7(5):439–445

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  23. Vanderveken OM, Devolder A, Marklund M, Boudewyns AN, Braem MJ, Okkerse W, Verbraecken JA, Franklin KA, De Backer WA, Van de Heyning PH (2008) Comparison of a custom made and a thermoplastic device for the treatment of mild sleep apnea. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 178:197–202

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Levendowski DJ, Morgan T, Westbrook P (2012) Initial evaluation of a titration appliance for temporary treatment of obstructive sleep apnea. J Sleep Disord Ther 1(1):101

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Almeida FR, Parker JA, Hodges JS, Lowe AA, Ferguson KA (2009) Effect of a titration polysomnogram on the treatment success of a mandibular repositioning appliance. J Clin Sleep Med 5(3):198–204

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  26. Local coverage determination (LCD) for positive airway pressure (PAP) devices for the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea (L11528) Jan 1, 2013

  27. Tsai WH, Vazquez JC, Oshima T, Dort L, Roycroft B, Lowe AA, Hajduk E, Remmers JE (2004) Remotely controlled mandibular positioner predicts efficacy of oral appliances in sleep apnea. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 170:366–370

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Bonato R, Bradley D (2013) Introducing a novel micro-recorder for the detection of oral appliance compliance: DentiTrac®. Sleep Diagnosis Therapy 8(3):12–15

    Google Scholar 

  29. Weaver EM, Woodson BT, Steward DL (2005) Polysomnography indexes are discordant with quality of life, symptoms, and reaction times in sleep apnea patients. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg 132(2):255–262

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The George Washington University School of Medicine, Washington, DC, USA

    Sylvan S. Mintz

  2. Children’s National Medical Center, Washington, DC, 20010, USA

    Reka Kovacs

Authors
  1. Sylvan S. Mintz
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Reka Kovacs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sylvan S. Mintz.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institutional and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Declaration of Helsinki and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards. For this type of study, formal consent is not required.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Mintz, S.S., Kovacs, R. The use of oral appliances in obstructive sleep apnea: a retrospective cohort study spanning 14 years of private practice experience. Sleep Breath 22, 541–546 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11325-018-1643-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11325-018-1643-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation