A pilot study on comparison of subjective titration versus remotely controlled mandibular positioning during polysomnography and drug-induced sleep endoscopy, to determine the effective protrusive position for mandibular advancement device therapy

• Published in: Sleep & breathing 2022-12, Vol.26 (4), p.1837-1845
• Main Authors: Kazemeini, Elahe, Op de Beeck, Sara, Vroegop, Anneclaire, Van Loo, Dorine, Willemen, Marc, Verbraecken, Johan, Braem, Marc J., Vanderveken, Olivier M., Dieltjens, Marijke
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Apnea; Dentistry; Endoscopy; Internal Medicine; Mandible; Medicine; Medicine & Public Health; Neurology; Oral Appliance Therapy; Otorhinolaryngology; Patients; Pediatrics; Pneumology/Respiratory System; Sleep; Sleep Breathing Physiology and Disorders • Original; Sleep Breathing Physiology and Disorders • Original Article; Sleep disorders; Titration
• ISSN: 1520-9512; 1522-1709
• DOI: 10.1007/s11325-022-02569-3

Study objectives The aim of this pilot study was to evaluate the clinical effectiveness of subjective titration versus objectively guided titration during polysomnography (PSG) and drug-induced sleep endoscopy (DISE) in mandibular advancement device (MAD) therapy for patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). Methods In this pilot cross-over study, patients underwent three titration procedures in randomized order: (1) subjective titration, (2) PSG-guided titration using a remotely controlled mandibular positioner (RCMP) and (3) DISE-assisted titration using RCMP. After each titration procedure, patients used the MAD for 1 month at the targeted protrusion obtained according to the preceding titration procedure. For each procedure, a follow-up PSG was performed after 1 month of MAD use in order to evaluate the efficacy of the MAD. Results Ten patients were included in the study. Overall, no significant differences in targeted optimal protrusion compared to maximal comfortable protrusion among the three titration methods were observed. There was no significant difference in reduction in AHI. In this study, PSG titration correctly classified 50% of patients as ‘responder’. A higher predictive accuracy was found for DISE titration with a sensitivity of 83.3% and a specificity of 100%. Conclusions This pilot randomized cross-over trial showed no differences in optimal mandibular positioning and corresponding efficacy of MAD between subjective titration, DISE titration or PSG titration.