Post Reply 
[News] Oral Appliance Year in Review
Author Message
ApneaNews Offline
Apnea News Correspondent
Advisory Members

Posts: 170
Joined: Feb 2012

Machine: IBM Selectric II
Mask Type: Full face mask
Mask Make & Model: 3M N95 (it gets dusty in the newsroom)
Humidifier: Sears Kenmore (circa 1979)
CPAP Pressure: 3200 psi
CPAP Software: Other Software

Other Comments: I report, therefore I am.

Sex: Undisclosed
Location: In the newsroom (where else?)

Post: #1
Oral Appliance Year in Review
Oral Appliance Year in Review

by Sheri Katz, DDS, American Board of Dental Sleep Medicine


Indications for the use of oral appliance therapy (OAT) in the management of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) have been increasing, along with a growing body of research and the resultant patient-centered protocols in recent years. In 1995, the American Sleep Disorders Association and Sleep Research Society published “Oral Appliances for the Treatment of Snoring and Obstructive Sleep Apnea: A Review.”1 The project referenced 21 publications based solely on case studies, describing a total of 320 patients. Ten years later, for the update paper of 2005, “Oral Appliances for Snoring and Obstructive Sleep Apnea: A Review,” 15 randomized control trials were referenced.2 The American Academy of Sleep Medicine (AASM) developed the current practice parameters for the Treatment of Snoring and Obstructive Sleep Apnea with Oral Appliances from this review.

Currently, a joint task force, charged by the AASM and American Academy of Dental Sleep Medicine (AADSM), is reviewing the last 10 years of the literature in order to develop an updated practice parameter paper. Approximately 34 randomized control trials are being utilized for this project.

The amount of literature and the scope of medicine that the research has covered is giving sleep medicine practitioners increased confidence in the use of oral appliance therapy to treat OSA. Over the past year, oral appliance research in the areas of health outcomes, side effects, and compliance has broadened the understanding not only of the rate of use with the therapy but also of how use influences areas such as blood pressure, temporomandibular disorders, and occlusal changes. Recent research by Andren, Iftikhar, Phillips, Cohen-Levy, Doff, Perez, and Vanderveken has added to this body of evidence over the past year.

Health Outcomes


Effects of treatment with oral appliance on 24-hour blood pressure in patients with obstructive sleep apnea and hypertension: a randomized clinical trial3

The object of this pilot study was to evaluate the potential effects of oral appliance therapy on blood pressure. A total of 72 patients with obstructive sleep apnea were randomly assigned to an active group (an oral appliance with mandibular advancement) or a control group (an oral appliance with no mandibular advancement). At baseline and, then again, after 3 months, patients had sleep studies and 24-hour blood pressure monitoring. The results showed an improvement in blood pressure when OAT was used and compared to controls. An even stronger trend toward lowering blood pressure was observed when patients with normal blood pressure and those with mild OSA were excluded in the analysis.

Effect of oral appliances on blood pressure in obstructive sleep apnea: a systematic review and meta-analysis. 4

The objective of this study was to conduct a meta-analysis of studies that have evaluated the effect of oral appliance therapy on blood pressure. Data from observational and randomized control trials were extracted from seven studies involving 399 patients utilizing OAT to manage their OSA. Pre- and post-treatment diastolic, systolic, and mean arterial blood pressure was analyzed. The meta-analysis shows oral appliances have a favorable effect on the systolic, diastolic, and mean arterial blood pressure.

Health outcomes of CPAP versus oral appliance treatment for obstructive sleep apnea5

The health effects of 108 patients, after 1 month of optimal CPAP and mandibular advancement device (MAD) therapy in the treatment of OSA, were studied. These patients were diagnosed with moderate to severe OSA. The 24-hour blood pressure, subjective sleepiness driving simulator performance, and quality of life (FOSQ, SF-36) were compared between these two treatment modalities. The findings were as follows: CPAP reduced the AHI to a greater extent (CPAP AHI=4.5±6.6/hr, MAD AHI=11.1±12.1/hr), but (self) reported compliance was higher on MAD (MAD: 6.50±1.3 hrs/night versus CPAP: 5.20±2.0 hrs/night). Neither treatment improved blood pressure (note how this contrasts with the above studies by Andren and Phillips). By comparison, the research demonstrated that sleepiness, driving simulator performance, and quality of life (QOL) improved on both treatments by similar amounts, although MAD patients tested better than CPAP for improving four general QOL areas.

Side Effects


Several recently published articles directly investigated side effects related to OAT. The articles explored temporomandibular disorders and occlusal (bite) changes.

Forces created by mandibular advancement devices in OSAS patients: a pilot study during sleep6

This study’s research measured the forces created by the progressive mandibular advancement during sleep. Nine patients were enrolled in this study and used Herbst-style devices. A pressure transducer system was placed on both the right and left lateral arm to measure the amount of force exerted for each millimeter of advancement. The mean force in this sample was 1.18 N/mm and showed an almost linear evolution. The author concluded that “the force values recorded in this study may explain the occlusal and skeletal side effects associated with long-term use of oral appliances.”

Long-term oral appliance therapy in obstructive sleep apnea syndrome: a controlled study on temporomandibular side effects7

The temporomandibular complex involves the temporomandibular joint and its supporting structures and the muscles of mastication. In this study, 51 patients were randomized to OAT and 52 to CPAP therapy in order to determine the effect of long-term OAT on these structures. After 2 months, 1 year, and 2 years of therapy, these patients were evaluated for the occurrence of pain-related temporomandibular disorders (TMDs). According to the authors, “This study shows that in the initial period after initiating oral appliance or CPAP therapy, the occurrence of (particularly pain-related) TMDs increases, being substantially higher (24%) in the oral appliance group than in the CPAP group (6%). No relationship could be found between the mean mandibular protrusion and the frequency of wearing the appliance during follow-up with the occurrence of pain and function impairment of the temporomandibular complex.”

The study also found no associations between pain intensity and mandibular protrusion and only minor changes in the occurrence of pain-related TMDs after 2 years of treatment in both groups.

Only in the initial period of treatment was the occurrence of pain-related TMD higher in the OAT group (24%) when compared to CPAP (6%). At the 2-year appointment, there was little difference between the two groups.

The incidence and prevalence of temporomandibular disorders and posterior open bite in patients receiving mandibular advancement device therapy for obstructive sleep apnea8

In this study, through questionnaires and clinical examination, a record of 167 patients’ occlusion plus their temporomandibular health was evaluated prior to initiating oral appliance therapy in the treatment of OSA. A total of 159 patients returned for evaluation after 118 days of OAT. A total of 129 patients returned for evaluation after 208 days and 85 returned after 413 days. The results of these evaluations showed that the use of MADs may lead to the development of TMDs in a small number of patients. Nevertheless, these symptoms are most likely transient. In this particular study, posterior open bites (significant bite changes) were found to develop in 17.9% of patients; however, only 28.6% of these patients were aware of any bite changes.

Compliance


Objective measurement of compliance during oral appliance therapy for sleep-disordered breathing9

In this prospective clinical trial, 51 consecutive patients, blinded to the purpose of the study, utilized oral devices with an “embedded microsensor thermometer chip.” At 3 months, the results showed an overall objective mean rate of use of 6.6 ± 1.3 hours per day with a regular OA users’ rate of 82%.

Interestingly, in the randomized crossover trial of CPAP versus OAT by Phillips et al,5 the authors strongly suggested that the observed result of patients with moderate to severe OSA having similar outcomes “was most likely explained by the greater efficacy of CPAP being offset by inferior compliance relative to MAD.”

Without a robust body of research 20 years ago, oral appliances were used only as a last resort when CPAP failed. Now, over the last 10 years, indications for OAT have increased dramatically, as evidenced by the 2005 recommendations.2 As more oral appliance research is published and the body of evidence grows in the areas of health outcomes, side effects, and compliance, advances in patient care will follow. SR
_____________________
Sheri Katz, DDS, Diplomate, American Board of Dental Sleep Medicine, received her dental degree from Emory University. Katz is past-president of the American Academy of Dental Sleep Medicine and holds membership in the American Dental Association and the Georgia Dental Association. She practices in Decatur, Ga, and has limited her practice to the treatment of patients with sleep-disordered breathing.

References

1. Thorpy M, Chesson A, Derderian S, et al. Practice parameters for the treatment of snoring and obstructive sleep apnea with oral appliances. SLEEP. 1995;18(6):511-513.
2. Sleep Apnea with Oral Appliances: An Update for 2005.
An American Academy of Sleep Medicine Report.
3. Andren A, Hedberg P, Walker-Engstrom M, Wahlen P, Tegelberg A. Effects of treatment with oral appliance on 24-h blood pressure in patients with obstructive sleep apnea and hypertension: a randomized clinical trial. Sleep Breath. 2012 Jul 21. [Epub ahead of print].
4. Iftikhar I, Hays E, Iverson M; Magalang UJ, Maas A. Effect of oral appliances on blood pressure in obstructive sleep apnea: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Sleep Med. 2013;9(2):165-742.
5. Phillips CL, Grunstein RR,
 Darendeliler MA, et al. Health outcomes of CPAP versus oral appliance treatment for obstructive sleep apnea: a randomised controlled trial. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2013;187(8):879-87. Epub 2013 Feb 14.
6. Cohen-Levy J, Petelle B, Pinguet J, Limerat E, Fleury B. Forces created by mandibular advancement devices in OSAS patients: a pilot study during sleep. Sleep Breath. 2012 Sep 11. [Epub ahead of print].
7. Doff MH, Veldhuis SK, Hoekema A, et al. Long-term oral appliance therapy in obstructive sleep apnea syndrome: a controlled study on temporomandibular side effects. Clin Oral Investig. 2012;16(3):689-97. doi: 10.1007/s00784-011-0555-6. Epub 2011 May 3.
8. Perez C, de Leeuw R, Okeson J, Carlson C, Bush H, Falace D. The incidence and prevalence of temporomandibular disorders and posterior open bite in patients receiving mandibular advancement device therapy for obstructive sleep apnea. Sleep Breath. 2013;17(1):323-32.
9. Vanderveken O, Dieltjens M, Wouters K, De Backer W, Van de Heyning PH, Braem MJ. Objective measurement of compliance during oral appliance therapy for sleep-disordered breathing. Thorax. 2013;68(1):91-6.




Fair use from:
http://www.sleepreviewmag.com/all-news/1...-in-review


The above post may contain copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. The material available is intended to advance the understanding of Sleep Apnea treatment and to advance the educational level of Sleep Apnea patients with regard to their health. Sometimes included is the full text of articles and documents rather than a simple link because outside links frequently "go bad" or change over time. This constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material in this post is distributed without fee or payment of any kind for research and educational purposes. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this post for purposes of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
(This post was last modified: 07-04-2013 06:49 PM by ApneaNews.)
07-04-2013 06:48 PM
Find all posts by this user Post Reply Quote this message in a reply

Donate to Apnea Board
martinsr00 Offline

Preferred Members

Posts: 32
Joined: May 2013

Machine: Respironics DS760TS
Mask Type: Full face mask
Mask Make & Model: Mirage Quattro
Humidifier: Respironics
CPAP Pressure: 8/12
CPAP Software: SleepyHead

Other Comments:

Sex: Male
Location: Southern California

Post: #2
RE: Oral Appliance Year in Review
It seems like an "either-or" in the studies. Why not both. My AHI scores dropped from a pre-treatment 57 to a 3.5 or so with a BIPAP. Adding OAT, my AHI scores hovered around 0.8. It also prevents teeth damage from bruxism (grinding of teeth).
07-04-2013 06:56 PM
Find all posts by this user Post Reply Quote this message in a reply
Paptillian Offline

Preferred Members-2

Posts: 474
Joined: Jun 2013

Machine: S9 AutoSet
Mask Type: Nasal pillows
Mask Make & Model: Swift FX
Humidifier: H5i
CPAP Pressure: 4 - 10, EPR x2
CPAP Software: ResScan SleepyHead

Other Comments:

Sex: Male
Location: Pennsylvania, USA

Post: #3
RE: Oral Appliance Year in Review
What? No blood-pressure reduction with either CPAP or MAD!?

That's disheartening. I was really looking forward to lowering my BP with treatment.

EDIT: I disagree that BP can't be lowered with CPAP. I've been on it for two weeks now and my pressure has come down. I measure it almost daily.
(This post was last modified: 07-04-2013 11:34 PM by Paptillian.)
07-04-2013 11:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Post Reply Quote this message in a reply

Donate to Apnea Board
PaulaO2 Offline
Wiki Editor
Moderators

Posts: 8,065
Joined: Feb 2012

Machine: S9 Autoset
Mask Type: Full face mask
Mask Make & Model: F&P Simplus
Humidifier: H5i
CPAP Pressure: 14-20
CPAP Software: SleepyHead

Other Comments: Ehlers-Danlos Syndrome, Hypermobility Type; chronic sarcasm

Sex: Undisclosed
Location: western NC, USA

Post: #4
RE: Oral Appliance Year in Review
Oh heck yeah. Mine dropped significantly after I started using CPAP. And when my blood pressure started rising far too high, after much testing and freaking, it was determined my pressure needed to be raised. A few weeks after doing so, it was back to "normal".

PaulaO2
Apnea Board Moderator
www.ApneaBoard.com


Breathe deeply and count to zen.

INFORMATION ON APNEA BOARD FORUMS OR ON APNEABOARD.COM SHOULD NOT BE CONSIDERED AS MEDICAL ADVICE. ALWAYS SEEK THE ADVICE OF A PHYSICIAN BEFORE SEEKING TREATMENT FOR MEDICAL CONDITIONS, INCLUDING SLEEP APNEA. INFORMATION POSTED ON THE APNEA BOARD WEB SITE AND FORUMS ARE PERSONAL OPINION ONLY AND NOT NECESSARILY A STATEMENT OF FACT.
07-05-2013 12:31 AM
Find all posts by this user Post Reply Quote this message in a reply
mlsmith45 Offline

Members

Posts: 7
Joined: Feb 2014

Machine: none
Mask Type: Not using mask
Mask Make & Model: none
Humidifier: none
CPAP Pressure: none
CPAP Software: Not using software

Other Comments: Oral appliance wearer

Sex: Male
Location: Toronto, Ontario, Canada

Post: #5
RE: Oral Appliance Year in Review
Interesting study. I'm a wearer of an oral appliance. It has been great for me. I have mild to moderate sleep apnea, and was told a CPAP would be over kill for me. I think my bite has change somewhat, but I don't have any pain. Although I suffered through two treatments of braces as a kid, so I'm used to pain in my mouth.
02-04-2014 10:25 AM
Find all posts by this user Post Reply Quote this message in a reply

Donate to Apnea Board
GreyParrot Offline

Preferred Members

Posts: 53
Joined: Dec 2013

Machine: ResMed S9 Elite
Mask Type: Full face mask
Mask Make & Model: Mirage Quattro
Humidifier: H5i-Unused
CPAP Pressure: 12.5
CPAP Software: ResScan

Other Comments:

Sex: Male
Location:

Post: #6
RE: Oral Appliance Year in Review
Here are my health stats after starting to treat my apnea. I have changed my lifestyle as well
but it all started with my CPAP treatment.

Blood Pressure before: 158/108..............Now: 117/77
Resting BPM before: 100bpm..................Now 42bpm
Weight before: 193lbs............................Now 148lbs
AHI before: 48.1 ...................................Now well under 3.0 no obstructives
most nights under 1.0 consisting of a few under 10 centrals

I monitor every day with ResScan and a pulse oximeter.
I have made my self treatment kind of my hobby so compliance is not an issue.
02-04-2014 12:18 PM
Find all posts by this user Post Reply Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Possibly Related Threads...
Thread: Author Replies: Views: Last Post
  [Treatment] One Year in and still have tired days Sleepyv 17 489 12-01-2016 02:58 AM
Last Post: kwhenrykerr
  Came across a Sleep Review Magazine Beej 1 199 11-12-2016 07:52 PM
Last Post: justMongo
  1 Month data review request dontwantapnea 14 673 08-14-2016 10:19 AM
Last Post: dontwantapnea
  1 year in, some thoughts and advice to newbies ISnoreBadly 14 1,241 08-07-2016 03:07 AM
Last Post: FFOGHORN
  [split] Dental Appliance vs CPAP Krull 2 355 06-06-2016 03:06 PM
Last Post: Sleepster
  1 month review please?! FrankNichols 26 1,355 05-05-2016 11:39 AM
Last Post: OpalRose
  Today is my One Year Anniversary on Apneaboard Forum SaldusMiegas 11 754 04-13-2016 03:05 PM
Last Post: Mosquitobait

Forum Jump:

Who's Online (Complete List)