Compliance and Efficacy of Titratable Thermoplastic versus Custom Mandibular Advancement Devices

 

Friedman MHamilton CSamuelson CGKelley KPearson-Chauhan KTaylor DTaylor RMaley AHirsch MA.

Source

Advanced Center for Specialty Care, Advocate Illinois Masonic Medical Center, Chicago, Illinois, USA.

Abstract

Objective. To share our experiences treating patients with obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea syndrome (OSAHS) with titratable thermoplastic (TPD) and custom-made mandibular advancement devices (MAD) and to compare these devices in terms of objective improvement and cure and treatment success (improvement/cure plus adherence at 6 months).Study Design. Case series with planned data collection.Setting. Tertiary care center.Subjects and Methods. Patients with OSAHS who failed or refused both continuous positive airway pressure () and surgery had a titratable oral appliance fitted. Patients were offered an office-fitted TPD or a custom-made dentist-fitted device. Assessment included pretreatment and appliance-titration polysomnography (PSG). Improvement was defined as ≥50% apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) reduction plus posttreatment AHI <20, and cure was defined as AHI <5. Patients were contacted at 1 and 6 months regarding treatment adherence.Results. A total of 180 patients (123 TPD, 57 custom) with complete PSG data were reviewed. Improvement/cure were significantly better with the custom device overall (91.2%/71.9% vs 77.2%/52.0%, P = .024/.012). Adherence data at 1 and 6 months were obtained from 128/180 and 119/180 patients, respectively. Using an intention-to-treat analysis, those lost to follow-up were considered nonadherent. Adherence at 1/6 months was 64.9%/50.9% for custom versus 53.7%/32.5% for TPD (P = .156/.018), yielding treatment success rates (with initial improvement/cure) of 49.1%/40.4% for custom versus 27.6%/17.1% for TPD (P = .005/<.001) at 6 months.Conclusion. Custom-fit devices achieve higher rates of objective improvement and cure of OSAHS than TPD at the time of titration-PSG. TPDs have a high acceptance rate, low cost, and reasonable initial improvement and cure rates of 77.2% and 52.0%, respectively, but significantly poorer 6-month compliance.

 

Related posts:

  1. Efficacy of two mandibular advancement appliances in the management of snoring and mild-moderate sleep apnea: a cross-over randomized study.
  2. Effects on blood pressure after treatment of obstructive sleep apnoea with a mandibular advancement appliance – a three-year follow-up
  3. Assessing Changes in the Apnea/Hypopnea Index Resulting from Increased Vertical Dimension of Occlusion of Mandibular Repositioning Devices

Related Posts