Key points
âąSome patients with obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) respond well to oral appliance therapy, whereas others do not for reasons that are unclear.
âąIn the present study, we used goldâstandard measurements to demonstrate that patients with a posteriorlyâlocated tongue (natural sleep endoscopy) exhibit a preferential improvement in collapsibility (lowered critical closing pressure) with oral appliances.
âąWe also show that patients with both posteriorlyâlocated tongue and less severe collapsibility (predicted responder phenotype) exhibit greater improvements in severity of obstructive sleep apnoea (i.e. reduction in event frequency by 83%, in contrast to 48% in predicted nonâresponders).
âąThe present study suggests that the structure and severity of pharyngeal obstruction determine the phenotype of sleep apnoea patients who benefit maximally from oral appliance efficacy.
Abstract
A major limitation to the administration of oral appliance therapy for obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) is that therapeutic responses remain unpredictable. In the present study, we tested the hypotheses that oral appliance therapy (i) reduces pharyngeal collapsibility preferentially in patients with posteriorlyâlocated tongue and (ii) is most efficacious (reduction in apnoeaâhypopnea index; AHI) in patients with a posteriorlyâlocated tongue and lessâsevere baseline pharyngeal collapsibility. Twentyâfive OSA patients underwent upper airway endoscopy during natural sleep to assess tongue position (type I: vallecula entirely visible; type II: vallecula obscured; type III: vallecula and glottis obscured), as well as obstruction as a result of other pharyngeal structures (e.g. epiglottis). Additional sleep studies with and without oral appliance were performed to measure collapsibility (critical closing pressure; Pcrit) and assess treatment efficacy. Overall, oral appliance therapy reduced Pcrit by 3.9 ± 2.4 cmH2O (mean ± SD) and AHI by 69 ± 19%. Therapy lowered Pcrit by an additional 2.7 ± 0.9 cmH2O in patients with posteriorlyâlocated tongue (types II and III) compared to those without (type I) (P < 0.008). Posteriorlyâlocated tongue (p = 0.03) and lower collapsibility (p = 0.04) at baseline were significant determinants of (greaterâthanâaverage) treatment efficacy. Predicted responders (type II and III and Pcrit < 1 cmH2O) exhibited a greater reduction in the AHI (83 ± 9 vs. 48 ± 8% baseline, P < 0.001) and a lower treatment AHI (9 ± 6 vs. 32 ± 15 events hâ1, P < 0.001) than predicted nonâresponders. The site and severity of pharyngeal collapse combine to determine oral appliance efficacy. Specifically, patients with a posteriorlyâlocated tongue plus lessâsevere collapsibility are the strongest candidates for oral appliance therapy.