Oral appliance treatment for obstructive sleep apnea: an update.

  title={Oral appliance treatment for obstructive sleep apnea: an update.},
  author={Kate Sutherland and Olivier M. Vanderveken and Hiroko Tsuda and Marie Marklund and Fr{\'e}d{\'e}ric Gagnadoux and Clete A. Kushida and Peter A. Cistulli},
  journal={Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine},
  volume={10 2},
  • K. Sutherland, O. Vanderveken, P. Cistulli
  • Published 15 February 2014
  • Medicine
  • Journal of clinical sleep medicine : JCSM : official publication of the American Academy of Sleep Medicine
Oral appliances (OA) have emerged as an alternative to continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) for obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) treatment. The most commonly used OA reduces upper airway collapse by advancing the mandible (OAm). There is a strong evidence base demonstrating OAm improve OSA in the majority of patients, including some with more severe disease. However OAm are not efficacious for all, with approximately one-third of patients experiencing no therapeutic benefit. OAm are… 

Tables from this paper

Mandibular advancement devices in obstructive sleep apnea: an updated review

The main focus of this paper is to focus on the general concepts and mechanisms of action of MAD, while highlighting important characteristics in the context of their use as a viable and effective treatment option for OSA patients.

Update on Oral Appliance Therapy for OSA

OAs are effective, but their efficacy is more variable than that of CPAP, and more research is needed about the mechanism of action, subjective effects and long-term health outcomes.

Mandibular advancement splints for the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea

Treatment of OSA with mandibular advancement splints could provide an equivalent health benefit to CPAP despite not achieving a complete normalization of polysomnographic indices, mediated by differences in adherence profiles.

The multisystemic effects of oral appliance therapy for obstructive sleep apnea: A narrative review

The role of oral appliance (OA) therapy, including mandibular advancement devices, as an alternative option for snoring and OSA patients who do not comply with or refuse CPAP usage is supported.

Long-Term Effectiveness of Two Oral Appliances for Obstructive Sleep Apnea : a Case Report

Evaluation of two types of oral appliances in the treatment of apnea revealed that PLP® was more effective because it provided more comfort and a greater capacity for mandibular advancement, when compared to a device which did not allow the jaw to move laterally.

Update on oral appliance therapy

Oral appliances are increasingly recommended for selected patients with obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) and those who do not tolerate nor prefer continuous positive airway pressure. The most commonly

Mandibular positioning techniques to improve sleep quality in patients with obstructive sleep apnea: current perspectives

MAD remains inferior to CPAP in reducing the apnea–hypopnea index (AHI) with a treatment success ranging between 24% and 72%.

The use of mandibular advancement devices for the treatment of Obstructive Sleep Apnea Review

Dental devices are an acceptable option for the treatment of OSA apart from CPAP and can be effectively used in mild to moderate OSA because of their ease of use, lower cost and because they can be well-tolerated.

Advances in the Treatment of Obstructive Sleep Apnea

Opinion statementThis article focuses on the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), using the most recent available data. The first choice of treatment for patients with moderate or severe



Mandibular advancement splints for the treatment of sleep apnea syndrome.

Although MAS are less efficacious in reducing polysomnographic indices of OSA than the standard treatment, Continuous Positive Airway Pressure, improvements in health outcomes appear to be comparable and the superiority of CPAP in improving oxygen desaturations and reducing AHI may be extenuated by its low compliance, resulting in both treatments having similar effectiveness in clinical practice.

Oral appliances for obstructive sleep apnea: an evidence-based analysis.

Based on the results of the RCTs analyzed for this review, MAS devices are less effective than CPAP when AHI is used as the outcome of interest, and there is no clear patient preference for MAS or CPAP among the studies reporting preference and satisfaction.

Non-CPAP therapies in obstructive sleep apnoea: mandibular advancement device therapy

MADs are recommended for patients with mild to moderate OSA and for those who do not tolerate CPAP, and the treatment must be followed up and the device adjusted or exchanged in relation to the outcome.

Oral appliances for snoring and obstructive sleep apnea: a review.

The literature of OA therapy for OSA now provides better evidence for the efficacy of this treatment modality and considerable guidance regarding the frequency of adverse effects and the indications for use in comparison to CPAP and UPPP.

Mandibular advancement titration for obstructive sleep apnea: optimization of the procedure by combining clinical and oximetric parameters.

A combination of the patient's subjective evaluation and oximetric score improves the effectiveness of the OA titration procedure.

Combined oral appliance and positive airway pressure therapy for obstructive sleep apnea: a pilot study

Combination therapy of MAD and nasal CPAP is effective in normalizing respiratory disturbances of sleep apnea in selected OSA patients who are intolerant to CPAP.

Efficacy of positive airway pressure and oral appliance in mild to moderate obstructive sleep apnea.

Although both CPAP and mandibular advancement splint effectively treated sleep-disordered breathing and sleepiness, the expected response in neurobehavioral function was incomplete and may be due to the splint having a lesser therapeutic effect and CPAP being poorly tolerated and therefore used less in this patient group.

An individually adjustable oral appliance vs continuous positive airway pressure in mild-to-moderate obstructive sleep apnea syndrome.

Even in patients with mild-to-moderate OSAS, CPAP is the more effective long-term treatment modality, and the better compliance seen with the ISAD may be advantageous.

Health Outcomes of CPAP versus Oral Appliance Treatment for Obstructive Sleep Apnea: A Randomised Controlled Trial

Important health outcomes were similar after 1 month of optimal MAD and CPAP treatment in patients with moderate-severe OSA and sleepiness, driving simulator performance and disease-specific QOL improved on both treatments by similar amounts although MAD was superior to CPAP for improving four general QOL domains.