MedElevator Войти в исследования
← Поиск публикаций

DOI 10.1093/sleep/34.4.469

Медицинская библиотека · Sleep · 2011

Comparative effects of two oral appliances on upper airway structure in obstructive sleep apnea.

Sutherland Kate, Deane Sheryn A, Chan Andrew S L, Schwab Richard J, Ng Andrew T, Darendeliler M Ali, Cistulli Peter A

Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАПеревод пока не подготовлен

Аннотация

STUDY

OBJECTIVES

Oral appliances are increasingly being used for treatment of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Mandibular advancement splint (MAS) mechanically protrudes the mandible, while the tongue stabilizing device (TSD) protrudes and holds the tongue using suction. Although both appliances can significantly improve or ameliorate OSA, their comparative effects on upper airway structure have not been investigated.

DESIGN

Cohort study.

SETTING

Sleep Investigation Unit.

PATIENTS: 39 patients undergoing oral appliance treatment for OSA.

INTERVENTIONS: OSA patients underwent magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the upper airway during wakefulness at baseline and with MAS and TSD in randomized order. Treatment efficacy was determined by polysomnography in a subset of 18 patients.

MEASUREMENTS AND

RESULTS

Upper airway lumen and surrounding soft tissue structures were segmented using image analysis software. Upper airway dimensions and soft tissue centroid movements were determined. Both appliances altered upper airway geometry, associated with movement of the parapharyngeal fat pads away from the airway. TSD increased velopharyngeal lateral diameter to a greater extent (+0.35 ± 0.07 vs. +0.18 ± 0.05 cm; P<0.001) and also increased antero-posterior diameter with anterior displacement of the tongue (0.68 ± 0.04 cm; P<0.001) and soft palate (0.12 ± 0.03 cm; P<0.001). MAS resulted in significant anterior displacement of the tongue base muscles (0.35 ± 0.04 cm). TSD responders (AHI reduction ≥50%) increased velopharyngeal volume more than non-responders (+2.65 ± 0.9 vs. -0.44 ± 0.8 cm(3); P < 0.05). Airway structures did not differ between MAS responders and non-responders.

CONCLUSIONS

These results indicate that the patterns and magnitude of changes in upper airway structure differ between appliances. Further studies are warranted to evaluate the clinical relevance of these changes, and whether they can be used to predict treatment outcome.

Для цитирования: Sutherland Kate, Deane Sheryn A, Chan Andrew S L, Schwab Richard J, Ng Andrew T, Darendeliler M Ali, Cistulli Peter A. Comparative effects of two oral appliances on upper airway structure in obstructive sleep apnea.. Sleep. 2011. DOI: 10.1093/sleep/34.4.469.

Предметные рубрики MeSH

Подготовка и перевод публикации
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…

История · было → стало

Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.

Тип публикации указан по данным источника. Уровень доказательности автоматически не присваивается.