This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Online Data Supplement Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Petit, F.-X. Articles by Lévy, P. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Petit, F.-X. Articles by Lévy, P.

Mandibular Advancement Devices

Rate of Contraindications in 100 Consecutive Obstructive Sleep Apnea Patients

Department of Acute Specialized Medicine and Sleep Laboratory, PRETA Laboratory TIMC UMR CNRS 5525, and Department of Maxillofacial Surgery, University Hospital, Grenoble; and Department of Respiratory Medicine and Sleep Laboratory, University Hospital, Nancy, France

Correspondence and requests for reprints should be addressed to Patrick Lévy, Département de Médecine Aigue Spécialisée, Unité Sommeil et Respiration, CHU de Grenoble, BP 217 X, 38043, Grenoble, France. E-mail: PLevy{at}chu-grenoble.fr

Mandibular advancement devices (MAD) should be contraindicated (Clark GT, Sleep Med Rev 1998;2:163–174) if there are: (1) insufficient teeth to support the device, (2) periodontal problems inducing tooth mobility, (3) active temporomandibular joint (TMJ) disorder, and (4) limited maximum protrusive distance (< 6 mm). The aim of the present study was to evaluate the proportion of the obstructive sleep apnea population that exhibits any contraindication (CI) to MAD. For this study there were 100 unselected adult patients consecutively diagnosed by polysomnography in a tertiary sleep laboratory. Clinical and radiologic evaluation of the dental, periodontal, and TMJ status of these 100 patients were performed by two expert maxillofacial surgeons, blind to each other, permitting the identification of MAD CIs. The two maxillofacial surgeons agreed on MAD absolute CIs in 96 of the 100 patients. CIs were identified in 34% of the patients. The nature of the CIs systematically referred to an insufficient number of remaining teeth (mean number of teeth lost: 7.8 ± 6.1 with 31 patients having had more than 10 teeth removed). The tooth avulsions were significantly higher in contraindicated compared with noncontraindicated patients (16 ± 8 versus 4 ± 3, p < 0.00001). Periodontal abnormalities coexisted with dental CI in approximately half of the patients. A TMJ disorder was considered as significant enough to lead to CI in two patients. Dental and periodontal care was needed in 16 patients before the use of MAD could be considered. Conclusions were that primary CIs were present in 34% of 100 consecutive patients, mainly owing to dental problems. Moreover, another subgroup of patients (16%) required close supervision and follow-up to avoid impairment of preexisting TMJ and dental problems. Such a high rate of CI should be considered when the overall efficacy of oral appliances is compared with other treatments, such as surgery or nasal continuous positive airway pressure.

Key Words: mandibular advancement device • contraindications • sleep apnea • treatment

This article has been cited by other articles:

				O. M. Vanderveken, A. Devolder, M. Marklund, A. N. Boudewyns, M. J. Braem, W. Okkerse, J. A. Verbraecken, K. A. Franklin, W. A. De Backer, and P. H. Van de Heyning Comparison of a Custom-made and a Thermoplastic Oral Appliance for the Treatment of Mild Sleep Apnea Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., July 15, 2008; 178(2): 197 - 202. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Boudewyns, M. Marklund, and W. Hochban Alternatives for OSAHS treatment: selection of patients for upper airway surgery and oral appliances Eur. Respir. Rev., December 1, 2007; 16(106): 132 - 145. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				K. Hashimoto, T. Ono, E.-i. Honda, K. Maeda, H. Shinagawa, S. Tsuiki, S. Hiyama, T. Kurabayashi, and K. Ohyama Effects of mandibular advancement on brain activation during inspiratory loading in healthy subjects: a functional magnetic resonance imaging study J Appl Physiol, February 1, 2006; 100(2): 579 - 586. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. Barnes, R. D. McEvoy, S. Banks, N. Tarquinio, C. G. Murray, N. Vowles, and R. J. Pierce Efficacy of Positive Airway Pressure and Oral Appliance in Mild to Moderate Obstructive Sleep Apnea Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., September 15, 2004; 170(6): 656 - 664. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Hoekema, B. Stegenga, and L.G.M. de Bont EFFICACY AND CO-MORBIDITY OF ORAL APPLIANCES IN THE TREATMENT OF OBSTRUCTIVE SLEEP APNEA-HYPOPNEA: A SYSTEMATIC REVIEW Critical Reviews in Oral Biology & Medicine, May 1, 2004; 15(3): 137 - 155. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				M. J. Tobin Sleep-Disordered Breathing, Control of Breathing, Respiratory Muscles, and Pulmonary Function Testing in AJRCCM 2002 Am. J. Respir. Crit. Care Med., February 1, 2003; 167(3): 306 - 318. [Full Text] [PDF]