Ho JT, et al. J Dent Anesth Pain Med. 2021 Dec;21(6):507-525. https://doi.org/10.17245/jdapm.2021.21.6.507

This systematic review aimed to comparatively evaluate the efficacy and safety of maxillomandibular advancement (MMA) and upper airway stimulation (UAS) in obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) treatment. A MEDLINE and Embase database search of articles on MMA and/or UAS for OSA was conducted. Twenty-one MMA studies and nine UAS studies were included. All the MMA studies demonstrated a reduction in apnea hypopnea index (AHI) postoperatively, and success rates ranged from 41.1% to 100%. Ten MMA studies reported pre- and postoperative Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS), and all but one study demonstrated a reduction in ESS. In the UAS studies, all but one demonstrated a reduction in AHI, and success rates ranged from 26.7% to 77.8%. In the eight UAS studies reporting pre- and postoperative ESS, an ESS reduction was demonstrated. No studies reported any deaths related to MMA or UAS. The most common postoperative complications after MMA and UAS were facial paresthesia in the mandibular area and discomfort due to electrical stimulation, respectively. This systematic review suggests that both MMA and UAS are effective and generally safe therapies for OSA. However, due to the limitations of the included studies, there is no evidence yet to directly compare these two procedures in OSA treatment.

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) on its own, as well as its risk factors, have been found to be associated with the outcome of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). However, the association between the degree of OSA and COVID-19 severity is unclear. Therefore, the aim of the study was to evaluate whether or not parameters to clinically evaluate OSA severity and the type of OSA treatment are associated with COVID-19 severity. Patient data from OSA patients diagnosed with COVID-19 were reviewed from outpatients from the Isala Hospital and patients admitted to the Isala Hospital, starting from March until December 2020. Baseline patient data, sleep study parameters, OSA treatment information and hospital admission data were collected. Apnea hypopnea index (AHI), low oxyhemoglobin desaturation (LSAT), oxygen desaturation index (ODI), respiratory disturbance index (RDI), and the type of OSA treatment were regarded as the independent variables. COVID-19 severity–based on hospital or intensive care unit (ICU) admission, the number of days of hospitalization, and number of intubation and mechanical ventilation days–were regarded as the outcome variables. Multinomial regression analysis, binary logistic regression analysis, and zero-inflated negative binomial regression analysis were used to assess the association between the parameters to clinically evaluate OSA severity and COVID-19 severity. A total of 137 patients were included. Only LSAT was found to be significantly associated with the COVID-19 severity (p<0.05) when COVID-19 severity was dichotomized as non-hospitalized or hospitalized and ICU admission or death. Therefore, our findings showed that LSAT seems to be a significant risk factor for COVID-19 severity. However, the degree of OSA–based on AHI, ODI, and RDI–and OSA treatment were not found to be risk factors for COVID-19 severity when looking at hospital or ICU admission, the number of days of hospitalization, and number of intubation and mechanical ventilation days.

Purpose: The goal of this review is to provide sleep physicians, dentists, and researchers with an evidence-based overview of the literature on smart mandibular advancement devices (MADs) for the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea. Methods: A systematic literature search was conducted by two blinded reviewers and an information specialist. A smart MAD was defined as any MAD with additional functionality besides mandibular protrusion. The bibliographic databases Medline, Embase, and Scopus were used to identify relevant publications. Studies were included if they described any stage of development of smart MADs. A total of 3162 titles and abstracts were screened for their relevance. In total, 58 articles were selected for full-text screening, 26 of which were included in this review. Results: The overall quality of the available literature was low. Most of the studies were observational, clinical or applied-research articles. The authors classified MADs into two main groups: passive and active. Passive MADs measured patient data, most commonly patient compliance. Active MADs adjusted protrusion of the mandible in response to patient data and were found in various phases of technological readiness (in development, demonstration, or deployment). Conclusion: Innovations in smart mandibular advancement devices most frequently track patient compliance. Devices measuring other health parameters and active, feedback-controlled, devices are increasingly reported on. However, studies demonstrating their added benefit over traditional methods remain sparse. With further study, smart mandibular advancement devices have the potential to improve the efficiency of obstructive sleep apnea treatment and provide new treatment possibilities.

The aim of this study was to evaluate the clinical efficacy of maxillomandibular advancement (MMA) for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) patients with a percentage of central and mixed apnea index in the total apnea-hypopnea index (CMAI%) ≧25%. Patients treated with MMA for OSA were retrospectively evaluated for baseline and postoperative patient data and polysomnographic results. The pre- and postoperative obstructive, central and mixed apnea parameters were compared. Of the included 78 patients, 21 patients (27%) presented with CMAI% ≧25% (median CMAI%, 49.1%; 35.9-63.8) prior to MMA. In 67% of these cases, MMA resulted in CMAI% <25 (median CMAI%, 6.1%; 2.1-8.9) and significantly improved the apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) (p < 0.001), the lowest oxyhemoglobin saturation (p < 0.001), central and mixed apnea index (p < 0.001), percentage of central and mixed apneas of total AHI (p = 0.004), central apnea index (p < 0.001), and mixed apnea index (p < 0.001). CMAI% ≧25% emerged in 25% of patients after MMA (median CMAI%, 49.1%; 35.9-63.8). Within the undeniable limitations of the study, it seems that the presence of CMAI% ≧25% should not be regarded as a contraindication for MMA in OSA patients.

This retrospective study aimed to: (1) investigate the surgical accuracy of maxillomandibular advancement (MMA) in obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) patients, with a specific focus on maxillary and mandibular advancement and counter-clockwise rotation and (2) investigate the correlation between the amount of achieved advancement and the reduction in the relative apnea hypopnea index (AHI). Sixteen patients, for whom a three-dimensional virtual surgical plan was generated preoperatively and a computed tomography scan (CT) or cone-beam computer tomography (CBCT) was acquired postoperatively, were included. The postoperative CT or CBCT was compared to the virtual surgical plan, and differences in the mandibular and maxillary advancement and counter-clockwise rotation were assessed. Maxillary and mandibular advancement (median 3.1 mm, p = 0.002 and 2.3 mm, p = 0.03, respectively) and counter-clockwise rotation (median 3.7°, p = 0.006 and 4.7°, p = 0.001, respectively) were notably less than intended. A significant correlation was found between the planned maxillary advancement and the difference between the planned and actual maxillary advancement (p = 0.048; adjusted R² = 0.1979) and also between the planned counter-clockwise rotation and the difference between the planned and actual counter-clockwise rotation for the mandible (p = 0.012; adjusted R² = 0.3261). Neither the maxilla-first nor the mandible-first surgical sequence proved to be superior in terms of the ability to achieve the intended movements (p > 0.45). Despite a significant reduction (p = 0.001) in the apnea hypopnea index (AHI) from a median of 62.6 events/h to 19.4 events/h following MMA, no relationship was found between the extent of maxillary or mandibular advancement and AHI improvement in this small cohort (p = 0.389 and p = 0.387, respectively). This study underlines the necessity for surgeons and future research projects to be aware of surgical inaccuracies in MMA procedures for OSA patients. Additionally, further research is required to investigate if sufficient advancement is an important factor associated with MMA treatment outcome.