BACKGROUND: The American Association of Orthodontists white paper on obstructive sleep apnea and orthodontics remains the most authoritative statement on the topic. This was produced in 2019 due to increasing orthodontic interest in obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) and the lack of formal guidelines for orthodontists. Since the white paper\'s release, advocacy for contrarian ideas and practices remain. Orthodontists are sometimes acting as primary care providers for OSA. Procedures appropriate only for screening are sometimes being used for diagnosis. The side effects of effective treatments such as mandibular advancement devices need further consideration. Also, research has clarified the effectiveness and ineffectiveness of treatments such as palatal expansion.
RESULTS: Part of an orthodontist\'s role is screening for OSA. The correct action when this is suspected remains referral to the appropriate physician specialist for diagnosis and treatment or coordination of treatment. Orthodontists may participate in the treatment of patients with OSA as a member of a multi-disciplinary team. Effective orthodontic treatments may include orthognathic surgery with maxillomandibular advancement and mandibular advancement devices. The negative effects of the latter make this a choice of last resort. Current research indicates that OSA alone is not sufficient indication for palatal expansion.
CONCLUSIONS: Orthodontists should appropriately screen for obstructive sleep apnea. This may be done as part of our health histories, our clinical examination, and review of radiographs taken for purposes other than the diagnosis and screening for OSA. Orthodontic treatment for OSA can be helpful and effective. However, this may be done only after referral to the appropriate physician specialist, as part of a multi-disciplinary team, with consideration of the likely effectiveness of treatment, and after all likely and potential negative consequences have been considered and thoroughly discussed with the patient.

Objective The objective of this study is to evaluate the clinical performance of a novel, precision, oral appliance therapy (OAT) medical device made entirely from a US Pharmacopeia (USP) medical grade class VI qualified material for the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Methods This was a multi-center, single-arm, chart-based, retrospective study of 91 patients diagnosed with OSA, treated utilizing a novel, precision, OAT medical device. Performance criteria were overall efficacy (reduction of OSA events to less than 10 per hour); efficacy for patients with severe OSA (reduction of OSA events to less than 20 per hour and a 50% improvement); and compliance (the rate of continuation of treatment after at least a one-year follow-up, or, conversely, the rate of discontinuation of treatment due to material-related adverse events or side effects after one year).  Results Eighty-nine percent of all subjects diagnosed with all levels of OSA severity were successfully treated to an apnea hypopnea index (\"AHI\") < 10 events per hour. Ninety-eight percent of subjects diagnosed with mild to moderate OSA were successfully treated to an AHI < 10. Eighty percent of subjects with severe OSA, without screening or excluding subjects for airway collapse profile, were successfully treated to an AHI < 20 with a 50% improvement in AHI. After a minimum one-year follow-up period, 96% of patients were confirmed to remain in active treatment. No subjects were reported to discontinue treatment due to adverse events or side effects. Conclusions This novel, precision OAT medical device made from the USP Class VI qualified material demonstrated efficacy and safety for the treatment of patients with OSA.

UNASSIGNED: Discomfort has been related to the poor acceptance of a mandibular advancement device (MAD) in patients with obstructive sleep apnea. The present study compared severe initial side effects between a smaller and a larger degree of mandibular advancement in patients with a good protrusive capacity.
UNASSIGNED: Consecutive patients with obstructive sleep apnea and a good protrusive capacity (≥8 mm) were randomized to start treatment with the mandible advanced by either 70% of maximum protrusion (Adv70%) or by 4 mm (Adv4mm) in a pilot study with a parallel design. The main outcome was tenderness or pain in the teeth or jaws using a 0-10 visual analogue scale (VAS) (from \"not at all\" to \"very extensive\") or excluded use because of side effects during the first week of treatment. Secondary outcomes included salivation problems and bite changes.
UNASSIGNED: Eighteen patients were randomly selected and 17 patients fulfilled the study protocol. Four patients in the Adv70% group and none in the Adv4mm group reported severe tenderness or pain (VAS ≥7) on five or more of the seven days (p=0.03). The degree of mandibular advancement measured in millimeters correlated with the number of days with severe side effects, r=0.64 (p=0.006). The secondary side effects were minor.
UNASSIGNED: Starting MAD treatment with 70% mandibular advancement was related to more severe side effects during the first week of treatment compared with a smaller fixed millimeter value in patients with a good protrusive capacity in this pilot study.

Obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) is the most common breathing-related sleep disorder. It is characterized by recurrent episodes of partial or complete airway obstruction during sleep, resulting in a reduction in or the total cessation of airflow, despite ongoing respiratory efforts, leading to oxygen desaturation and arousal. The purpose of this literature review is to evaluate the most common characteristics of this pathology, as well as to investigate the most effective treatment options, providing an update on the management of OSA patients.

Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA) is one of the most common sleep disorders. A mandibular advancement device (MAD) can be used to manage primary snoring and OSA cases. It is mostly indicated in cases with mild to moderate OSA. This case reports shows the successful management of severe OSA using MAD. A 34-year-old male presented to the orthodontic clinic with a diagnosis of severe OSA, apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) of 71 events per hour with symptoms of loud snoring, witnessed gasping, morning headache, and excessive daytime sleepiness. The case was managed using MAD to position the lower jaw in a forward position during sleep with 7 mm advancement. Progress sleep study results showed that the AHI reached normal levels, with only two hypopnea events per hour and a complete resolution of apnea episodes. The patient\'s symptoms subsided after using MADs. This case report documents that severe OSA can be managed with MAD in suitable cases.

To analyze relative efficacies of mandibular advancement devices (MAD) in sleep apnea treatment.
From eligible randomized controlled trials (RCT), MADs were classified based on their mechanistic designs. Data on apnea-hypopnea index (AHI), Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS), nadir oxygen saturation (minSaO2), and sleep efficiency (SE%) from RCTs were then analyzed in network meta-analyses, and relative ranking of different MADs was computed based on P scores (a method of ranking similar to SUCRA). Similar analyses were conducted based on the different brands of MADs.
There were no statistically significant differences between MADs in any of the outcomes analyzed. However, the P-scores, based on the point estimates and standard errors of the network estimates, ranked some MADs higher than others in some of the outcomes. Of the different mechanistic designs, the highest P scores were achieved for attached midline traction (P score = 0.84) and unattached bilateral interlocking (P score = 0.78) devices for AHI reduction, attached bilateral traction (P score = 0.78) and unattached bilateral interlocking (P score = 0.76) for ESS, monobloc (P score = 0.91) and unattached bilateral interlocking (P score = 0.64) for minSaO2, and unattached bilateral interlocking (P score = 0.82) and attached bilateral traction (P score = 0.77) for SE%. Notable findings in the network meta-analyses based on MAD brands, of the limited number of studies that specified them were the effects of SomnoDent Flex™, TAP™, and IST® in their effects on AHI reduction, with P scores of 0.94, 0.83, and 0.82, respectively. Monobloc decreased supine-AHI the most (- 44.46 [- 62.55; - 26.36], P score = 0.99), and unattached bilateral interlocking had the greatest effect on REM-AHI (- 11.10 [- 17.10; - 5.10], P score = 0.87).
Findings from this study show clinically (but not statistically) significant differences between MADs in terms of their relative efficacy when analyzed for different sleep apnea treatment outcomes and sleep apnea phenotypes.

UNASSIGNED: Sleep-disordered breathing (SDB) and other sleep disorders are very common conditions that can contribute to significant losses in quality of life, ability to work, and prognosis.
UNASSIGNED: What were the new findings in sleep and respiratory medicine between November 2019 and October 2021 that significantly impact the care of patients with SDB?
UNASSIGNED: A systematic literature search was conducted between November 2019 and October 2021 and the most relevant articles were selected.
UNASSIGNED: The most relevant findings for the care of patients with SDB were: 1) Continuos positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy may reduce arterial blood pressure in patients with SDB, but does not reduce the risk of myocardial infarction or stroke in asymptomatic or oligosymptomatic patients with SDB. 2) After it was shown in recent years that in selected patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) mandibular advancement devices (MAD) are effective treatment options, MADs have also been reimbursable as second-line therapy after CPAP since 2021. 3) Solriamfetol and pitolisant have been approved by the European Medicines Agency (EMA) for the indication of residual daytime sleepiness in patients with OSA. 4) Telemedicine techniques may be helpful in the long-term management of patients with SDB.
UNASSIGNED: The studies discussed provide relevant results for the care of patients with SDB.

Objectives To evaluate the effectiveness of a new mandibular advancement device (MAD) (Prosomnus® [IA] Sleep Device, Prosomnus Sleep Technologies, Pleasanton CA) fitted with a compliance tracker as a first-line treatment in a population of patients with mild to severe obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Methods Treatment effectiveness was measured using pre and post-treatment home sleep testing (HST) and validated sleep and quality of life questionnaires. Mean disease alleviation (MDA) was calculated to compare the treatment effectiveness of MAD to historical continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) effectiveness data. Results MAD was found to be an effective first-line treatment for patients with mild, moderate, and severe sleep apnea with excellent compliance rates, similar to or better than CPAP, and an equal or better MDA of 56.7% compared to literature values of 50% for CPAP. Conclusions MAD should be considered an effective first-line treatment for patients with mild and moderate sleep apnea and for severe sleep apnea for patients who prefer, refuse, or are not candidates for CPAP.

A mandibular advancement device (MAD) is a commonly used treatment modality for patients with mild-to-moderate obstructive sleep apnea. Although MADs have excellent therapeutic efficacy, dental side effects were observed with long-term use of MADs. The aim of this study was to analyze the force distribution on the entire dentition according to the materials and design of the MADs. Three types of MADs were applied: model 1 (single layer of polyethylene terephthalate glycol (PETG)), model 2 (double layer of PETG + thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU)), and model 3 (core-reinforced multilayer). In the maxilla, regardless of the model, the incisors showed the lowest force distribution. In most tooth positions, the force distribution was lower in models 2 and 3 than in model 1. In the mandible, the mandibular second molar showed a significantly lower force in all models. The mandibular incisors, canines, and molars showed the highest force values in model 1 and the lowest values in model 3. Depending on the material and design of the device, the biomechanical effect on the dentition varies, and the core-reinforced multilayered MAD can reduce the force delivered to the dentition more effectively than the conventional single- or double-layer devices.

Oral appliances (OA), a common treatment modality for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), are not suitable for patients with nasal obstruction. Rhinomanometry, the gold standard technique to assess nasal airway resistance, is not readily available in sleep dentistry clinics. We demonstrate the use of a portable lightweight peak nasal inspiratory flow (PNIF) rate meter to objectively assess nasal airflow and utilized the Nasal Obstruction Symptom Evaluation (NOSE) scale to subjectively assess nasal obstruction in 97 patients with OSA and 105 healthy controls. We examined the correlations between the following variables between the groups: demographics, body mass index, PNIF, NOSE scale scores, apnea-hypopnea index (AHI), minimum SpO2 (SpO2min), Mallampati classification, and Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) scores. Patients with OSA had significantly lower PNIF values and higher NOSE scores than controls. In the patient group, PNIF was not significantly correlated with AHI, SpO2min, Mallampati classification, or NOSE or ESS scores. Lower PNIF values and higher NOSE scores suggested impaired nasal airflow in the OSA group. As daytime PNIF measurement bears no relationship to AHI, this cannot be used alone in predicting the suitability of treatment for OSA with OA but can be used as an adjunct for making clinical decisions.