Sleep-disordered breathing: choosing the right cephalometric analysis.

PURPOSE: Cephalometry can be helpful for choosing the optimal treatment of sleep apnea. The presence or absence of maxillomandibular retrusion can contribute to the choice of treatment with an oral appliance or a skeleton-based or soft tissue surgery. To measure the position of the maxillomandibular complex, the analysis of Tweed has been cited most often. It uses dental landmarks. The analysis of Delaire relies on deeper skeletal points. The present study compared these 2 analyses for the diagnosis of maxillomandibular retrusion in a context of sleep-disordered breathing by determining the correlation between retrusion and the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) for both methods. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in a tertiary care university hospital. The population consisted of patients diagnosed with sleep-disordered breathing for whom polysomnographic and cephalometric data were available. Tweed and Delaire cephalometric analyses were performed for each case. The main outcome was the correlation between the degree of maxillomandibular retrusion and the AHI, as determined by Pearson coefficients. RESULTS: A total of 243 patients (42 females and 201 males) were included. For maxillary retrusion, the correlation coefficient with the AHI was -0.109 (P = .089) for Tweed and -0.160 (P = .012) for Delaire. For mandibular retrusion, the coefficient was -0.090 (P = .16) for Tweed and -0.201 (P = .002) for Delaire. Statistical significance was found only for the analysis of Delaire. CONCLUSION: The correlation between maxillomandibular retrusion and the AHI was better using the analysis of Delaire. If cephalometry is to be included in the workup of sleep-disordered breathing, the analysis of Delaire might be preferable.

Does propulsion mechanism influence the long-term side effects of oral appliances in the treatment of sleep-disordered breathing?

BACKGROUND: Mandibular advancement appliances (MAAs) can be used to treat sleep-disordered breathing, and differences in their designs have been thought to influence the occurrence of secondary effects. With bibloc devices, the lateral attachments producing mandibular propulsion can be inserted to generate traction or compression. We evaluated the clinical impact of this difference by comparing the long-term secondary effects and compliance of two devices. METHODS: One hundred sixty-two records of patients fitted with a traction-based or compression-based MAA before January 2008 were reviewed retrospectively for physical examination findings and cephalometry. Patients were sent a postal survey and contacted by phone 2 weeks later. They were offered a follow-up medical visit with repeat cephalometry. Main outcomes were long-term (> 2 years) secondary effects, compliance, or satisfaction. RESULTS: Of the patients who attended the follow-up visit, 48 had worn the MAA for > 2 years (16 traction based and 32 compression based), and nine for < 6 months (used as control subjects). Mean follow-up times for the traction and compression groups were 3.7 ± 1.2 years and 3.6 ± 1.2 years, respectively. No difference was found between the MAAs for subjective and objective side effects, except for greater early pain to the masticatory muscles (P = .02) and residual tongue pain (P = .04) in the compression group. However, pain intensity was low and clinical relevance was uncertain. No difference was found for compliance, satisfaction, and objective or subjective efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that traction-based appliances are similar to compression-based devices with regard to secondary effects and compliance.

The tongue-retaining device: efficacy and side effects in obstructive sleep apnea syndrome.

STUDY OBJECTIVES: The tongue-retaining device is a customized monobloc oral appliance used in the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS). This study evaluated tongue-retaining device efficacy and its tolerance by patients with OSAS. METHODS: The charts of 84 apneic patients were retrospectively analyzed, and patients were contacted by telephone to answer an oral questionnaire. The median follow-up time was 5 years. RESULTS: Based on the apnea-hypopnea index, a complete or partial response was obtained in 71% of the cases. The mean apnea-hypopnea index decreased significantly from 38 to 14 (p < 0.001) with the tongue-retaining device. The subjective intensity of snoring decreased by 68% (p < 0.0001) and the Epworth Sleepiness Scale score decreased from 9 to 6 (p < 0.05). An age of more than 60 years associated with a mandibular protrusion distance inferior or equal to 7 mm was predictive of a nonresponse (odds ratio [OR]: 7.25; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.43-36.7; p < 0.02). The compliance rate, as determined by answers to the questionnaire, was 52% after 5 years of follow-up. Nasal obstruction was a negative predictor of good compliance (OR: 6.94; 95% CI: 0.28-0.79; p < 0.005), whereas patients with Class I occlusion were more compliant than patients with Class II or III occlusions (OR: 3.83; 95% CI: 1.00-2.81; p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Tongue-retaining device performance tended to be similar to that of the mandibular advancement device. Thus, teams trained in tongue-retaining device fabrication and fitting may propose it as an alternative to continuous positive airway pressure, taking nasal obstruction into consideration as a contraindication.

Complications/adverse effects of maxillomandibular advancement for the treatment of OSA in regard to outcome.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate adverse effects/postoperative complications and surgical response rate of maxillomandibular advancement for the treatment of severe obstructive sleep apnea syndrome. STUDY DESIGN: Case series with chart review. SETTING: Otolaryngology Head and Neck Surgery Department in a teaching hospital. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A total of 59 consecutive severe sleep apnea patients underwent maxillomandibular advancement. Systemic complications were evaluated from medical charts. Functional adverse effects and cosmetic consequences were evaluated by questionnaires. The treatment outcome was assessed by polysomnography. RESULTS: Fifty patients were evaluated. They had a mean age of 46.4 +/- 9.0 years. No serious postoperative complication was observed. The most frequent local complication was mental nerve sensory loss. Most patients reported cosmetic changes. The mean apnea-hypopnea index decreased from 65.5 +/- 26.7 per hour to 14.4 +/- 14.5 per hour (P < 0.0001). Light-sleep stages were also decreased (P < 0.0001), whereas deep-sleep stages were increased (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Maxillomandibular advancement can induce local adverse effects and cosmetic changes, but they seem to be considered as secondary to the patients according to the surgical outcome.