Search

Abstract 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.

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: Maxillomandibular advancement (MMA) is an effective surgical treatment for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA); however, it is unclear how many patients who are referred for MMA actually undergo surgery. This study aims to determine follow‐up rates for patients referred for MMA and the reasons behind their choices. Methods: Via retrospective review, we assessed consecutive patients with OSA intolerant to continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) who underwent drug induced sleep endoscopy (DISE) between 2018 and 2020 at our institution. Patients recommended for MMA based on DISE and other findings were included. Patients were then contacted and administered an IRB‐approved survey in present time. Results: One hundred and fifty nine patients were referred to oral maxillofacial surgery (OMFS) for MMA consult. Seventy seven patients (48%) followed up with OMFS and 29 (18%) underwent MMA. Sixty two (40%) patients resumed CPAP. Fifty eight patients (36.5%) were lost to follow up. Seventy three patients (46%) completed our survey. Of those patients, 37 (51%) followed up with OMFS and 17 (23%) underwent MMA. Patients who did not follow up with OMFS cited the invasiveness of the surgery (39%), recovery time (17%), or both (31%) as reasons. Those who pursued consultation cited inability to tolerate CPAP (73%), not being a candidate for inspire (14%), and desire to learn about alternative treatments (14%) as reasons. Of those who did not undergo MMA, 28.6% are not using OSA treatment. Conclusion: Less than half of patients referred for MMA followed up, and less than half of those patients underwent MMA. Most patients cited concerns about the invasiveness of the surgery and recovery process. Level of Evidence: 4 Laryngoscope, 134:2964–2969, 2024 [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Study objectives: Maxillomandibular advancement (MMA) is an effective surgical option for patients suffering from obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). As a relatively new treatment option, patients may turn to the Internet to learn more. However, online patient education materials (OPEMs) on MMA may be written at a higher literacy level than recommended for patients. The aim of this study was to analyze the readability of OPEMs on MMA. Methods: A Google search of "maxillomandibular advancement" was performed, and the first 100 results were screened. Websites that met eligibility criteria were analyzed for their readability using the Automated Readability Index (ARI), Coleman-Liau Index (CLI), Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level (FKGL), Gunning Fog (GF), and Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) and compared to the recommended sixth-grade reading level using one-tailed t tests. Readability scores were compared based on the type of website, including hospitals/universities or physician clinics, using ANOVA tests. Results: The mean (SD) for ARI, CLI, FKGL, GF, and SMOG was 11.91 (2.43), 13.42 (1.81), 11.91 (2.06), 14.32 (2.34), and 13.99 (1.56), respectively. All readability scores were significantly higher than a sixth-grade reading level (p < 0.001). After comparing readability scores between different website types (university/hospital, clinic, and other), there was no statistical difference found. Conclusions: The available OPEMs on MMA surgery for OSA are above the recommended sixth-grade reading level. Identifying and reducing the gap between the reading levels of OPEMs and the reading level of the patient are needed to encourage a more active role, informed decisions, and better patient satisfaction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To compare the efficacy of maxillomandibular advancement (MMA) for patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) with class 2 versus 3 dentofacial deformities (DFDs). Study Design: Retrospective chart review. Setting: Tertiary sleep surgery center. Methods: Patients with OSA and DFD class 2 versus 3 undergoing MMA at Stanford Sleep Surgery between 2014 and 2021 were matched by preoperative body mass index (BMI), age, and sex. Postoperative outcome was compared with polysomnography measures and patient‐reported outcome measures (PROMs). Results: Twenty‐eight matched subjects, 14 in each deformity group were identified and assessed. The mean age (standard deviation) was 34.29 (10.21) and 33.86 (10.23) for classes 2 and 3, respectively. The apnea‐hypopnea index (AHI) decreased from 43.42 (28.30) to 9.6 (5.29) (p <.001) and 37.17 (35.77) to 11.81 (15.74) (p =.042) in class 2 and 3 subjects, respectively. The oxygen desaturation index (ODI) changed from 30.48 (24.02) to 6.88 (3.39) (p =.024) and 11.43 (11.40) to 5.44 (7.96) (p =.85) in class 2 and 3 subjects, respectively. The Epworth sleepiness scale changed from 8.93 (5.28) to 3.91 (2.70) (p =.018) and 10.23 (4.38) to 4.22 (3.07) (p =.006) in class 2 and 3 subjects, respectively. Conclusion: Among age, sex, and BMI‐matched subjects, MMA is equally effective in both dentofacial class 2 and 3 groups, both objectively and subjectively. Preoperatively, dentofacial class 2 patients with OSA presented with the more severe disease with higher AHI and ODI. Dentofacial class 3 patients with OSA may require additional attention to improve nasal function outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract Background The efficacy of mandibular advancement devices (MAD) and maxillomandibular advancement (MMA) in improving upper airway (UA) patency has been described as being comparable to continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) outcomes. However, no previous study has compared MAD and MMA treatment outcomes for the upper airway enlargement. This study aimed to evaluate three-dimensionally the UA changes and mandibular rotation in patients after MAD compared to MMA. Methods The sample consisted of 17 patients with treated with MAD and 17 patients treated with MMA matched by weight, height, body mass index. Cone-beam computed tomography from before and after both treatments were used to measure total UA, superior/inferior oropharynx volume and surface area; and mandibular rotation. Results Both groups showed a significant increase in the superior oropharynx volume after the treatments (p = 0.003) and the MMA group showed greater increase (p = 0.010). No statistical difference was identified in the MAD group considering the inferior volume, while the MMA group showed a significantly gain (p = 0.010) and greater volume (p = 0.024). Both groups showed anterior mandibular displacement. However, the mandibular rotation were statistically different between the groups (p

Objectives: To evaluate the effectiveness of maxillomandibular advancement surgery in the treatment of Obstructive Sleep Apnea by comparing the pre- and postoperative Apnea and Hypopnea Index, in addition to classifying the degree of evidence and risk of intervention bias. Methods: A systematic review of the literature was carried out in the PUBMED, LILACS, EMBASE, SCOPUS, WEB OF SCIENCE and COCHRANE platforms, including cohort studies with polysomnographic follow-up, without other associated pharyngeal or nasal surgical procedures. The risk of study bias was assessed using the Modified Delphi technique. Pre- and postoperative Apnea and Hypopnea Index data were plotted for meta-analysis, and the quality of evidence was assessed using the GRADE system. Results: Of 1882 references, 32 articles were selected for full-text reading, of which four studies were included, totaling 83 adults with obstructive sleep apnea who underwent maxillomandibular advancement. The meta-analysis was in favor of the intervention (DM = −33.36, 95% CI −41.43 to −25.29, p

Obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) is a syndrome with a high burden on public health. Maxillomandibular advancement (MMA) has proven to be a highly effective treatment option. This retrospective analysis evaluated the safety of maxillomandibular advancement with rotation in patients with OSA. A total of 63 patients with OSA were included in this study. Surgical treatment by maxillomandibular advancement was virtually planned based on preoperative cone beam computed tomography (CBCT). A 3D printed guide and a customised implant were used for surgical transfer. The safety of MMA was evaluated based on the necessity of postoperative intermediate care unit (IMCU) stay, duration of stay in hospital, and recording of medical complications. A total of 63.5% of the OSA patients treated by MMA (n = 40/63) were postoperatively transferred from the recovery room directly to the regular ward, while 36.5% of the patients (n = 23/63) stayed on IMCU for at least one night. On average, the length of hospitalisation was four days after surgery. One patient from the ward group and one patient from the IMCU group developed a major complication according to Clavian-Dindo classification grade IV. MMA is a safe surgical procedure. The necessity for postoperative monitoring in an IMCU setting should be based on an individual risk evaluation. However, since major complications can occur, MMA should be performed as an inpatient procedure in a hospital with available intensive medicine care. This study underlines the safety of MMA in OSA patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To identify potential predictors of surgical response to maxillomandibular advancement (MMA) in patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) from the most common clinically available data (patient-related, polysomnographic, cephalometric, and surgical variables). Methods: This was a retrospective study comprised of consecutive patients who underwent MMA for moderate to severe OSA. Relevant clinical, polysomnographic, cephalometric, and surgical variables were collected as independent variables (predictors). The association of the independent variables with a favorable surgical response to MMA was assessed in univariate and multivariate analyses. Results: In 100 patients (82% male; mean age 50.5 years), the mean apnea hypopnea index [AHI] was 53.1 events/h. The rate of favorable surgical response was 67%. Based on multivariate analysis, patients with cardiovascular disease (CVD) had 0.140 times lower odds of a favorable response to MMA (OR: 0.140 [0.038, 0.513], P = 0.003). For each 1-unit increase in central apnea index (CAI) and superior posterior airway space (SPAS), there were 0.828 and 0.724 times lower odds to respond favorably to MMA (OR: 0.828 [0.687, 0.997], P = 0.047; and 0.724 [0.576, 0.910], P = 0.006), respectively. Conclusion: The findings of this study suggest that the surgical outcome of MMA may be less favorable when patients with OSA have certain phenotypic characteristics: the presence of CVD, higher CAI and larger SPAS. If confirmed in future studies, these variables may guide patient selection for MMA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The efficacy of mandibular advancement devices (MAD) and maxillomandibular advancement (MMA) in improving upper airway (UA) patency has been described as being comparable to continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) outcomes. However, no previous study has compared MAD and MMA treatment outcomes for the upper airway enlargement. This study aimed to evaluate three-dimensionally the UA changes and mandibular rotation in patients after MAD compared to MMA. Methods: The sample consisted of 17 patients with treated with MAD and 17 patients treated with MMA matched by weight, height, body mass index. Cone-beam computed tomography from before and after both treatments were used to measure total UA, superior/inferior oropharynx volume and surface area; and mandibular rotation. Results: Both groups showed a significant increase in the superior oropharynx volume after the treatments (p = 0.003) and the MMA group showed greater increase (p = 0.010). No statistical difference was identified in the MAD group considering the inferior volume, while the MMA group showed a significantly gain (p = 0.010) and greater volume (p = 0.024). Both groups showed anterior mandibular displacement. However, the mandibular rotation were statistically different between the groups (p < 0.001). While the MAD group showed a clockwise rotation pattern (-3.97 ± 1.07 and − 4.08 ± 1.30), the MMA group demonstrated a counterclockwise (2.40 ± 3.43 and 3.41 ± 2.79). In the MAD group, the mandibular linear anterior displacement was correlated with superior [p = 0.002 (r=-0.697)] and inferior [p = 0.004 (r = 0.658)] oropharynx volume, suggesting that greater amounts of mandibular advancement are correlated to a decrease in the superior oropharynx and an increase in the inferior oropharynx. In the MMA group, the superior oropharynx volume was correlated to mandibular anteroposterior [p = 0.029 (r=-0.530)] and vertical displacement [p = 0.047 (r = 0.488)], indicating greater amounts of mandibular advancement may lead to a lowest gain in the superior oropharynx volume, while a great mandibular superior displacement is correlated with improvements in this region. Conclusions: The MAD therapy led to a clockwise mandibular rotation, increasing the dimensions of the superior oropharynx; while a counterclockwise rotation with greater increases in all UA regions were showed in the MMA treatment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: To investigate subjective efficiency outcomes after maxillomandibular advancement (MMA) surgery in obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) patients. Material and Methods: A prospective cohort study was carried out between December 2016 and May 2021, including 30 severe or treatment-refractory OSA patients treated by MMA surgery. All patients answered four validated questionnaires: the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS), Functional Outcomes of Sleep Questionnaire (FOSQ), Mandibular Function Impairment Questionnaire (MFIQ), and EQ-5D-3L (i.e., EQ-5D and EQ-VAS). They also answered one custom-made questionnaire (AMCSQ). Questionnaires were requested to be filled out 1 week before surgery and at least 6 months after surgery. Results: The total preoperative and postoperative scores on the questionnaires were compared. The mean total ESS (p < 0.01), FOSQ (p < 0.01), EQ-5D (p < 0.05), and EQ-VAS (p < 0.01) scores showed significant improvement, which was in accordance with an improvement in the mean postoperative apnea/hypopnea index score (p < 0.01). In contrast, the mean total MFIQ score (p < 0.01) indicated a decline in mandibular function. Conclusion: This study confirms the hypothesis that MMA surgery in OSA patients improves outcomes, both objectively and subjectively, with the exception of postoperative mandibular function. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The primary aim of this study was to assess the association between clinical efficacy outcomes (i.e., polysomnography (PSG) results) of maxillomandibular advancement (MMA) and surgeons' experience. The second aim was to assess the association between the occurrence of postoperative complications of MMA and surgeons' experiences. Patients treated with MMA for moderate to severe obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) were enrolled in this retrospective study. The patient population was divided into two groups based on two different surgeons performing MMA. The associations between surgeons' experience on the one hand and PSG results and postoperative complications on the other hand were investigated. A total of 75 patients were included. There was no significant difference in baseline characteristics between the two groups. The reductions in apnea-hypopnea index and oxygen desaturation index were both significantly greater in group-B than group-A (p = 0.015 and 0.002, respectively). The overall success rate after MMA was 64.0%. There was a negative correlation between surgeon experience and surgical success (odds ratio: 0.963 [0.93, 1.00], p = 0.031). No significant association was found between surgeon experience and surgical cure. Additionally, there was no significant association between surgeon experience and the occurrence of postoperative complications. Within the limitations of this study, it is concluded that surgeon experience may have little to no influence on the clinical efficacy and safety of MMA surgery in OSA patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To determine how surgery, continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), and no treatment impact health care utilization in patients who have obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Study Design: This is a retrospective cohort study of patients between the ages of 18 and 65 that were diagnosed with OSA (9th International Classification of Diseases) from January 2007 to December 2015. Data were collected over 2 years, and prediction models were generated to evaluate trends over time. Setting: A population‐based study using real‐world data and insurance databases. Methods: A total of 4,978,649 participants were identified, all with at least 25 months of continuous enrollment. Patients with previous soft tissue procedures not approved for OSA (nasal surgery), or without continuous insurance coverage were excluded. A total of 18,050 patients underwent surgery, 1,054,578 were untreated, and 799,370 received CPAP. IBM Marketscan Research database was utilized to describe patient‐specific clinical utilization, and expenditures, across outpatient, and inpatient services, and medication prescriptions. Results: When the cost of the intervention was eliminated in the 2‐year follow‐up, the monthly payments of group 1 (surgery) were significantly less than group 3 (CPAP) in overall, inpatient, outpatient, and pharmaceutical payments (p <.001). The surgery group was associated with less cumulative payments compared to the other 2 groups when the cost of the intervention (CPAP or surgery) was eliminated in all comorbidities and age groups. Conclusion: Treating OSA with surgery can lessen overall health care utilization compared to no treatment and CPAP. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Introduction: Maxillomandibular advancement (MMA) and genioglossus advancement (GA) are surgeries for patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Postoperative evaluation is primarily based on the apnea–hypopnea index (AHI) measured by polysomnography. The purpose of this study was to identify the timing of hyoid bone relocation after MMA and GA surgery and to investigate whether or not hyoid bone relocation can be an indicator of postoperative evaluation of OSA. Methods: Patients with OSA underwent MMA and GA surgery. Changes in hyoid bone position and tongue-to-oral volume ratio were analyzed on lateral radiographs before, immediately after, and 1 year after surgery. Then, a correlation was verified between these changes and postoperative AHI. Results: In 18 patients studied, the position of the hyoid bone did not show a constant tendency immediately after surgery. One year after surgery, the bone had moved anteriorly and toward the oral cavity in all patients compared to its preoperative position. And AHI correlated with the movement of the hyoid bone to the oral side. Discussion: One year after surgery, the tongue was adapted to the newly enlarged oral space, and as a result, the low position of the hyoid bone before the operation was improved. The findings suggest that the degree of lowering of the hyoid bone may be an indicator of the improvement of AHI. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Orthodontie Française is the property of John Libbey Eurotext Ltd. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of maxillomandibular advancement (MMA) on oral health-related quality of life (OHRQoL) in obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) patients prior to, immediately after, and up to 1 year after surgery. Methods: In this prospective study, OHRQoL was measured with the use of the Dutch version of the Oral Health Impact Profile questionnaire (OHIP-14NL). A total of 19 patients were asked to complete the questionnaires prior to surgery (T0), on the first 7 days post-surgery (T1-T7), and 1 month (T8), 6 months (T9), and at least 1 year post surgery (T10). The baseline OHIP score was compared with the post-surgery scores using the Wilcoxon signed-rank test with Bonferroni correction (significance at P

Background: Maxillomandibular advancement (MMA) has been shown to be the most effective surgical therapy for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Despite high success rates, there are patients who are considered as non-responders to MMA. In order to triage and inform these patients on their expected prognosis of MMA before the surgery, this study aimed to develop, internally validate, and calibrate a prediction model for the presence of surgical success for MMA in patients with OSA. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted that included patients that had undergone MMA for moderate to severe OSA. Baseline clinical, polysomnographic, cephalometric, and drug-induced sleep endoscopy findings were recorded as potential predictors. Presence or absence of surgical success was recorded as outcome. Binary logistic regression analyses were conducted to develop the model. Performance and clinical values of the model were analyzed. Results: One hundred patients were included, of which sixty-seven (67%) patients reached surgical success. Anterior lower face height (ALFH) (OR: 0.93 [0.87–1.00], p = 0.05), superior posterior airway space (SPAS) (OR: 0.76 [0.62–0.92], p < 0.05), age (OR: 0.96 [0.91–1.01], p = 0.13), and a central apnea index (CAI) <5 events/hour sleep (OR: 0.16 [0.03–0.91], p < 0.05) were significant independent predictors in the model (significance level set at p = 0.20). The model showed acceptable discrimination with a shrunken area under the curve of 0.74, and acceptable calibration. The added predictive values for ruling in and out of surgical success were 0.21 and 0.32, respectively. Conclusions: Lower age at surgery, CAI < 5 events/hour, lower ALFH, and smaller SPAS were significant predictors for the surgical success of MMA. The discrimination, calibration, and clinical added values of the model were acceptable. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This retrospective cohort study aimed: (1) to analyze the influence of apnea-predominant versus hypopnea-predominant obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) on surgical outcome after maxillomandibular advancement (MMA); and (2) to evaluate whether MMA alters the presence of apnea-predominant to hypopnea-predominant OSA more than vice versa. In total 96 consecutive moderate to severe OSA patients, who underwent MMA between 2010 and 2021, were included. The baseline apnea–hypopnea index, apnea index, and oxygen desaturation index were significantly higher in apnea-predominant group, while the hypopnea index was significantly higher in hypopnea-predominant group (p < 0.001). No significant difference was found between apnea-predominant group and hypopnea-predominant group in the degree of advancement of A-point, B-point, and pogonion. Surgical success and cure were significantly higher in the hypopnea-predominant group compared to the apnea-predominant group, 57.4% versus 82.1% (p = 0.021) and 13.2% versus 55.5% (p = 0.012), respectively. Of the 68 (70.8%) apnea-predominant patients, 37 (54.4%) shifted to hypopnea-predominant after MMA. Of the 28 (29.2%) hypopnea-predominant patients, 7 (25%) shifted to apnea-predominant postoperatively. These findings suggest that preoperative hypopnea-predominant OSA patients might be more suitable candidates for MMA compared to preoperative apnea-predominant OSA patients. Additionally, MMA proved to alter the presence of apnea-predominant to hypopnea-predominant OSA to a larger extend than vice versa. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) is a highly prevalent problem of public health, which is characterized by intermittent and repetitive narrowing of the airway while sleeping. Approximately half of the patients with OSAS therapy fail to comply with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) because of mask-related problems, treatment-related side effects, patient attitude, or perceived lack of benefit. The aim of the surgical therapies for the treatment of OSAS is to improve airway patency by operating on selected sites of obstruction. Different surgical modalities have been developed, since different anatomical locations may be responsible for a narrow upper airway. Consequently, the surgical approach needs to be individualized for each patient. Surgical treatment of OSAS presents variable efficacy but is capable of improving mortality and morbidity rates in selected patients. However, the surgery for OSAS is not a substitute for CPAP but is a salvage treatment option for patients who have failed CPAP and other conservative treatments, or had significant side effects of device use, or have a favorable anatomy such as tonsillar hypertrophy. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To carry out both an objective and subjective assessment of the facial esthetics, clinical outcome, and quality of life evaluation in 25 OSAS patients treated with telegnathic surgery. Methods: Patients were analyzed using AHI, Legan and Burstone and airway cephalometric analysis for the objective study together with youthful and esthetic perception and SF-36 health surveys for the subjective part. Results: Facial convexity, nasolabial and lower face-throat angle, upper lip protrusion, and vertical height-depth ratio improved the facial and neck esthetics, while the maxillary and mandibular prognathism increased. Eighty-eight percent considered an esthetic change on their facial profile and 52% a more youthful profile. FS-36 survey (pre- 48.86 and post-surgery 71.74) and AHI (pre- 41.32 and post-surgery 7.80) scores improved significantly. Discussion: Results after telegnathic surgery were both esthetically and clinically satisfactory. The FS-36 survey should be considered for monitoring treatment in OSAS patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Maxillomandibular advancement (MMA) is an effective treatment for obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome (OSAS) that is refractory to conventional treatment. However, it is a highly invasive procedure with several recognised side effects, and we know of few data on its effect on important patient-reported outcome measures (PROMS). Here we describe a case series of patients selected for MMA through our joint respiratory/maxillofacial surgery clinic, detailing the effect of MMA on objective physiological measurements and important PROMS. Patients with confirmed moderate/severe symptomatic OSAS who could not tolerate continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) or mandibular advancement devices (MAD) were assessed in the clinic for consideration of MMA. Preoperative and postoperative airway measurements, apnoea/hypopnoea index (AHI), Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS) score, and quality of life (10-point Likert scale), were recorded. A customised questionnaire was administered postoperatively to assess selected psychosocial and functional domains (sleep quality, energy levels, appearance, ability to perform daily activities, and mood) and patient satisfaction using five-point Likert scales. Over an 18 month period, 39 patients were referred for consideration of MMA. Ten patients (7 men and 3 women, mean age 49.9, mean BMI 27.5) underwent surgery, which resulted in significant improvements in ESS, quality of life, AHI, and airway diameters. All patients reported improvements in all psychosocial/functional domains except appearance, in which five reported no change or worsened appearance. All subjects felt that MMA provided better symptom control than CPAP. The most commonly reported side effects were facial/lip numbness (9/10) and affected bite (6/10). MMA resulted in significant improvements in ESS, quality of life, and a range of PROMS, with a high level of patient satisfaction. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: To evaluate the efficiency of maxillomandibular advancement using aggregated individual patient data from multiple studies. Materials and methods: This overview was structured according to the PICO strategy. It adhered to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses checklist and was recorded on the international prospective register of systematic reviews (PROSPERO-CRD42020206135). Searches were conducted in the PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, Embase, Web of Science, LILACS, and Cochrane databases for studies published until January 1, 2021. Data from the included studies were collected by one author, while another reviewed the compilation. Results: Twelve systematic reviews were included. The outcome measures studied were the apnea–hypopnea index, respiratory disturbance index, mean oxygen saturation, lowest oxygen saturation, sleepiness data, posterior air space, sella-nasion point A angle, sella-nasion point B angle, surgical success, and surgical cure in patients who underwent surgery. The AMSTAR scale presented moderate evaluations, with grades varying between 6 and 10 points. The Glenny scale revealed that the study selection did not include all languages. Only three reviews identified quality assessments conducted by at least two reviewers and only five related possible searches for unpublished data. Conclusions: Bimaxillary advancement surgery improved respiratory indicators, sleepiness data, and increased upper airway size. However, it is necessary to standardize the surgical criteria to establish measurable efficiency of the procedure. Clinical relevance: This overview makes a critical analysis of the results of the selected systematic reviews with the aim of presenting the most clinically relevant data on the maxillomandibular advancement for treating obstructive apnea syndrome, with a focus on improving respiratory, anatomical, and quality of life indices. There are no overviews that approach this theme from a well-structured perspective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Orthodontie Française is the property of John Libbey Eurotext Ltd. and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Maxillomandibular advancement has been shown to be an effective treatment for obstructive sleep apnea; however, the literature focuses mainly on sleep-related parameters such as apnea-hypopnea index, respiratory disturbance index and Epworth sleepiness scale. Other factors that may be important to patients, such as esthetics, patient satisfaction, nasality, swallowing problems and so forth have been reported in the literature but have not been systematically studied. Together with an information specialist, an extensive search in Medline, Embase and Scopus yielded 1592 unique articles. Titles and abstracts were screened by two blinded reviewers. In total, 75 articles were deemed eligible for full-text screening and 38 articles were included for qualitative synthesis. The most common categories of non-sleep related outcomes found were surgical accuracy, facial esthetics, functional outcomes, quality of life, patient satisfaction, and emotional health. All categories were reported using heterogenous methods, such that meta-analysis could not be performed. There was lack of consistent methods to assess these outcomes. This work is the first to systematically review non-sleep related outcomes of maxillomandibular advancement. Despite growing interest in evaluating surgical outcomes through patient subjective experiences, this review points to the need of standardized, validated methods to report these outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objectives: Maxillomandibular advancement (MMA) is an effective short-term treatment for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). This study aimed to evaluate the long-term stability of the facial skeleton, upper airway, and its surrounding structures, as well as improvement in OSA following MMA. Materials and methods: Thirty-one adults with moderate-to-severe OSA underwent surgery-first modified MMA as primary surgery. Polysomnography and cone-beam computed tomography were obtained pre-surgery, early post-surgery, and at follow-up (i.e., ≥ 2 years post-surgery). Image analysis software assessed the facial skeleton, upper airway, and its surrounding structures. Results: Early post-surgery, apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) had decreased significantly (p < 0.001) and the minimum oxygen saturation (MSAT) increased (p = 0.001), indicating significant improvement in OSA. At follow-up, the AHI and MSAT remained stable. However, the anterior maxilla, soft palate, and tongue moved backward while the hyoid moved downward. There was also a significant decrease in the minimal cross-sectional area of the oropharynx. The reduction in AHI was significantly related to the anterior movement of the anterior maxilla and tongue, inferior movement of the posterior maxilla, and superior movement of the soft palate tip. Conclusions: The improvement of OSA after modified MMA remained stable for at least 2 years following treatment, despite the relapse of the facial skeleton, upper airway, and its surrounding structures. The reduction of AHI was not related to changes in the caliber of the upper airway but to the movement of the maxilla, soft palate, and tongue. Clinical relevance Modified MMA is clinically effective for long-term treatment of patients with moderate-to-severe OSA. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Sleep surgery is part of a continuum of care for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) that involves medical, pharmacologic, and behavioral therapy. Upper airway surgery for OSA can significantly improve stability by way of modulating the critical negative closing pressure. This is the same mechanism of action as positive airway pressure or oral appliance therapy. The updated surgical algorithm in this review adds precision in three areas: patient selection, identification of previously unaddressed anatomic phenotypes with associated treatment modality, and improved techniques of previously established procedures. While the original Riley and Powell phase 1 and 2 approach to sleep surgery has focused on individual surgical success rate, this algorithm strives for an overall treatment success with multi-modal and patient-centric treatments.

There are many ways to categorize surgery for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), one of which is to distinguish between intrapharyngeal and extrapharyngeal procedures. While the general otolaryngologist treating OSA is familiar with intrapharyngeal procedures, such as uvulopalatopharyngoplasty and tongue base reduction, extrapharyngeal sleep operations such as maxillomandibular advancement (MMA) and upper airway stimulation (UAS) have evolved rapidly in the recent decade and deserve a dedicated review. MMA and UAS have both shown predictable high success rates with low morbidity. Each approach has unique strengths and limitations, and for the most complex of OSA patients, the two in combination complement each other. Extrapharyngeal airway operations are critical for achieving favorable outcomes for sleep surgeons.

Background: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a common sleep disorder associated with significant morbidities and mortality if untreated. Continuous positive airway pressure is the gold standard treatment for OSA, but poor adherence significantly limits its use. However, there is evidence to support the effectiveness of surgical treatments for OSA. Objectives: This study aimed to assess the experience of sleep physicians in Saudi Arabia in treating OSA using surgical options. Materials and Methods: This cross-sectional study featured an electronic survey that was sent to all sleep physicians across the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia between January 2018 and March 2018. The questionnaire contained questions on the demographics of the physicians and the types of surgical referral for patients with OSA. Results: Twenty-six physicians completed the questionnaire. More than two-thirds of the physicians preferred to refer their patients to otolaryngologists (69.23%), while the remainder preferred to refer their patients to oral and maxillofacial surgeons (23.07%). More than half of the physicians indicated that maxillomandibular advancement (MMA) was the most effective surgical procedure (53.8%), followed by adenotonsillectomy (19.2%), then uvulopalatopharyngoplasty (UPPP) (11.5%). Four physicians (15.4%) chose “none” as the best answer. More participants indicated that the benefits outweighed the risks for MMA (53.84%) than for UPPP (19.23%). Conclusion: Based on the opinions of sleep physicians in Saudi Arabia, MMA is the best surgical option for the treatment of moderate to severe OSA. Otolaryngologists are the preferred surgeons because they are more available than oral and maxillofacial surgeons physicians, who are scarce in Saudi Arabia.

Maxillomandibular advancement is an invasive but effective surgical option in the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) for patients who have severe AHI index or with OSA that has been refractory to other surgical methods. Maxillomandibular advancement achieves enlargement of the nasopharyngeal, retropalatal, and hypopharyngeal airway by physically expanding the facial skeleton through Le Fort I maxillary and mandibular sagittal split osteotomies. Although MMA is known to be reserved for patients with craniofacial dysmorphism, patients with normal osseous structure are often surgical candidates and have similarly good outcomes.

Background: An innovative approach for the primary and definitive treatment of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in adult patients is presented: Bilateral Internal Ramus Distraction of the mandible (BIRD), which is a slow, progressive and more stable procedure to advance the mandibular bone. This study investigated whether this surgical approach is useful to cure OSA.Methods: Study design was of an interventional (surgical) one-arm trial of OSA patients assessed before and 12 months after BIRD. All patients were evaluated by pre- and post-operative polysomnography and three-dimensional scans. The amount of skeletal advancement, percentage of upper airway volume increase and postoperative value of mandibular occlusal plane were the predictor variables. Changes in the apnoea-hypopnoea index (AHI), oxygen desaturation index (ODI), and percentage of time with saturation under 90% (TC90) were the main outcome variables.Findings: Thirty-two subjects with a mean ± SD age of 41.9 ± 13.3 years and 87.5% male were included, and they were followed-up 32 ± 14.2 months. AHI was 47.9 ± 23.1 per hour before surgery and the Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) was 13.4 ± 4.4. Postoperative AHI was 4.8 ± 5.6 per hour 12 months after surgery (P < 0.001), with 81.2% of the patients considered cured (AHI<5) and 18.8% suffering from a mild-to-moderate residual OSA. ESS decreased to 1.9 ± 1.8 at the end of the surgical treatment (P < 0.001). 3D changes revealed an upper airway volume increase of 188.4% ± 73.5% (P < 0.001).Interpretation: Lengthening the mandibular ramus by distraction osteogenesis to cure OSA appears to be more effective and safer when compared to other surgical protocols, especially in very severe cases with initial AHI>50/h. Titration of the mandibular advancement weekly using respiratory polygraphy allows better healing control and customization of the skeletal advancement, enhancing the aesthetic result. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]