Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 10, 2025
Drug-Induced Sleep Endoscopy DISE with Target Controlled Infusion TCI and Bispectral Analysis in Obstructive Sleep Apnea
Published on: December 6, 2016
Patient Selection for Efficacious Mandibular Advancement Device Therapy in Obstructive Sleep Apnea: An Institutional
Nainika Nanda1,2, Aaron Robertson1, David C Upton1
1Division of Otolaryngology-Head & Neck Surgery, Department of Surgery, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, USA.
Introduction:
Mandibular advancement devices (MADs) are a treatment option for obstructive sleep apnea/hypopnea syndrome (OSAHS); however, the ideal patient selection criteria continue to be refined.
Objectives:
To determine the overall efficacy of a custom titratable MAD in treating a subset of OSAHS patients. A secondary objective was to determine predictive factors affecting treatment outcome for MAD therapy.
Methods:
Retrospective analysis of a single otolaryngologist's (DCU) experience in 86 patients with Friedman Stages 2 to 4 treated with a MAD (Thornton Adjustable Positioner) at an academic medical center.
Results:
Therapeutic success as measured by type 3 home apnea test (HSAT) before and after proper MAD titration was defined as a 50% reduction in initial AHI or reduction of AHI to a mild severity below 15 events/hour. The 50% AHI reduction rate after MAD titration was 64% and the overall success rate inclusive of patients with reduction below 15 events/hour was 72.1%. MAD therapy significantly reduced the mean AHI (-10.4 ± 12.6), P < .001) and improved the minimum oxygen saturation (1.88 ± 5.79, P = .003). Significant reduction of OSAHS severity was seen across all treatment groups regardless of initial OSAHS severity: mild (55.9%), moderate (85%), severe (75%; P < .001 for all 3 groups). High BMI, advanced age, concentric velopharyngeal collapse pattern, prior pharyngeal surgery, and male sex were not statistically significant predictors of ineffectiveness.
Conclusions:
MAD therapy for OSAHS in patients with Friedman Stages 2 to 4 is an effective treatment in 72% of cases and should be considered as an initial treatment option within this subset of patients, inclusive of those with initially severe, moderate, and mild OSAHS.
