A computed tomographic evaluation of effect of mandibular advancement device at two different horizontal jaw positions in patients with obstructive sleep apnea
- PMID: 37124835
- PMCID: PMC10131076
- DOI: 10.1016/j.jobcr.2023.03.014
A computed tomographic evaluation of effect of mandibular advancement device at two different horizontal jaw positions in patients with obstructive sleep apnea
Erratum in
-
Erratum regarding missing declaration of competing interest statements in previously published articles.J Oral Biol Craniofac Res. 2024 Jul-Aug;14(4):360-361. doi: 10.1016/j.jobcr.2024.05.009. Epub 2024 May 23. J Oral Biol Craniofac Res. 2024. PMID: 38826841 Free PMC article.
Abstract
Statement of problem: Studies pertaining to the objective assessments of the efficacy of mandibular advancement device in patients with obstructive sleep apnea are scarce.
Purpose: The purpose of this clinical study was to evaluate the effect of MAD at two different horizontal positions of mandible on upper airway dimensions through computed tomography.
Material and methods: Twenty-nine consenting participants satisfying predetermined inclusion and exclusion criteria were enrolled and an adjustable two-piece MAD was fabricated at 50% maximum mandibular protrusion and after 4 weeks was adjusted to 70% protrusion. CT scans were obtained at baseline, 4 weeks after delivering MAD with 50% mandibular protrusion, and then after 4 weeks with 70% mandibular protrusion. Cross sectional area with diameters (lateral and anteroposterior) of upper airway was measured at three specific anatomic levels (retropalatal-RP, retroglossal-RG, and epiglottal-EG). Data were analyzed using the Student t-test for parametric analysis.
Results: Intragroup comparison revealed a statistically significant increase in lateral & anteroposterior dimensions as well as cross sectional area at all three anatomical levels at 4 weeks after MAD with 50% mandibular protrusion compared with baseline and 4 weeks after MAD with 70% mandibular protrusion compared with baseline. However, the difference between lateral and anteroposterior dimensions with MAD at 70% protrusion compared with MAD at 50% protrusion was not statistically significant. The difference between cross-sectional area was found to be statistically significant.
Conclusion: Mandibular advancement device at 70% mandibular protrusion is more effective compared with the device at 50% protrusion in relieving oropharyngeal obstruction seen in OSA.
© 2023 Published by Elsevier B.V. on behalf of Craniofacial Research Foundation.
Figures




References
-
- Young T., Palta M., Dempsey J., Skatrud J., Weber S., Badr S. The occurrence of sleep-disordered breathing among middle-aged adults. N Engl J Med. 1993;328:1230–1235. - PubMed
-
- Guilleminault C., Quo S.D. Sleep-disordered breathing. A view at the beginning of the new Millennium. Dent Clin. 2001;45:643–656. - PubMed
-
- Kimoff R.J., Sforza E., Champagne V., Ofiara L., Gendron D. Upper airway sensation in snoring and obstructive sleep apnea. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2001;164:250–255. - PubMed
-
- Guilleminault C., Li K., Chen N.H., Poyares D. Two-point palatal discrimination in patients with upper airway resistance syndrome, obstructive sleep apnea syndrome, and normal control subjects. Chest. 2002;122:866–870. - PubMed
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Research Materials