4.4 Article

Mandibular Advancement for Obstructive Sleep Apnea: Dose Effect on Apnea, Long-Term Use and Tolerance

期刊

RESPIRATION
卷 76, 期 4, 页码 386-392

出版社

KARGER
DOI: 10.1159/000156861

关键词

Apnea; Mandibular advancement; Obstructive sleep apnea; Oral appliance; Titration

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Previous studies have documented an effect of mandibular advancement (MA) on pharyngeal airway size and collapsibility. Objectives: We aimed to describe the course of the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) and the snoring index (SI) during progressive MA and to evaluate the long-term efficacy, tolerance and usage of MA therapy after progressive MA titration in sleep apnea patients. Methods: Sixty-six patients with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome underwent sequential sleep recordings during progressive MA titration. Long-term effectiveness, compliance and side effects of oral appliance (OA) in the titrated position were evaluated by questionnaires. Results: OA therapy was started at 80% of the maximum MA. Seventy percent of the patients had only one increment in MA with a marked decrease in mean AHI from 36 to 10. In the remaining cases, further increments in MA were associated with a progressive reduction in AHI and an increase in the number of patients responding to treatment. OA in the titrated position resulted in a 70% decrease in AHI, with 54% of patients showing complete responses, 29% partial responses and 17% no response. Daytime sleepiness and quality of life improved, too. Seventeen months after the start of treatment, 82% of the patients declared that they were still using OA almost all nights. Reported side effects including subjective occlusal changes were frequent but mild. Conclusions: Improvement in AHI during OA is dependent on the amount of MA. Sequential sleep recordings facilitate MA titration. Longterm MA therapy in the titrated position is effective and well tolerated. Reported side effects are frequent but mild. Copyright (c) 2008 S. Karger AG, Basel

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据