Mandibular advancement appliances and obstructive sleep apnoea: a randomized clinical trial. Outcomes in a 2-phase randomized clinical trial of early Class II treatment. Effects and adverse events of a dental appliance for treatment of obstructive sleep apnoea. Effectiveness of treatment for Class II malocclusion with the Herbst or twin-block appliances: a randomized, controlled trial. Effectiveness of early orthodontic treatment with the Twin-block appliance: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. Part 1: Dental and skeletal effects. Randomized controlled study of an oral jaw-positioning appliance for the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea in children with malocclusion. Functional appliance treatment assessed using the PAR index. Efficacy and comorbidity of oral appliances in the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea: a systematic review and preliminary results of a randomized trial. The correction of Class II, division 1 malocclusion with bionator headgear combination appliance.
This randomized placebo-controlled cross-over trial assessed the effectiveness of a mandibular advancement appliance (MAA) in managing obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA). Twenty-one adults, with confirmed OSA, were provided with a maxillary placebo appliance and a MAA for 4-6 weeks each, in a randomized order. Questionnaires at baseline and after each appliance assessed bed-partners' reports of snoring severity (loudness and number of nights per week), and patients' daytime sleepiness (Epworth Sleepiness Score, ESS). The Apnoea Hypopnoea Index (AHI) and Oxygen Desaturation Index (ODI) were measured at baseline and with each appliance during single night sleep studies. Seventy-nine per cent of subjects wore their MAA for at least 4 hours at night. Sixty-eight per cent of subjects wore their MAA for 6-7 nights per week. Excessive salivation was the most commonly reported complication. One subject was unable to tolerate the MAA and withdrew from the study. Among the remaining 20 subjects, the MAA produced significantly lower AHI and ODI values than the placebo. However, although the reported frequency and loudness of snoring and the ESS values were lower with the MAA than the placebo, these differences were not statistically significant. When wearing the MAA, 35 per cent of the OSA subjects had a reduction in the pre-treatment ODI to 10 or less, while 33 per cent had an AHI of 10 or less. The MAA was less effective in the subjects with the most severe OSA (pre-treatment ODI > 50 and/or pre-treatment AHI > 50). In a 2-phased, parallel, randomized trial of early (preadolescent) versus later (adolescent) treatment for children with severe (>7 mm overjet) Class II malocclusions who initially were developmentally at least a year before their peak pubertal growth, favorable growth changes were observed in about 75% of those receiving early treatment with either a headgear or a functional appliance. After a second phase of fixed appliance treatment for both the previously treated children and the untreated controls, however, early treatment had little effect on the subsequent treatment outcomes measured as skeletal change, alignment, and occlusion of the teeth, or length and complexity of treatment. The differences created between the treated children and untreated control group by phase 1 treatment before adolescence disappeared when both groups received comprehensive fixed appliance treatment during adolescence. This suggests that 2-phase treatment started before adolescence in the mixed dentition might be no more clinically effective than 1-phase treatment started during adolescence in the early permanent dentition. Early treatment also appears to be less efficient, in that it produced no reduction in the average time a child is in fixed appliances during a second stage of treatment, and it did not decrease the proportion of complex treatments involving extractions or orthognathic surgery. In a prospective study, 95 patients with mild to moderate obstructive sleep apnoea (OSA) were randomised to receive either surgical treatment, uvulopalatopharyngoplasty, (4-6 patients) or treatment with a nocturnal dental appliance for mandibular advancement (49 patients). Of the 49 dental appliance patients, 37 completed the 12-month follow-up. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects and adverse events of dental appliance treatment from a one-year perspective. Somnography was employed to measure treatment effects before and 12 months post-treatment. At the 12-month control, somnography was performed twice: the first time with the dental appliance and the second time without it. Adverse events were recorded 2 weeks and 3, 6, and 12 months after treatment was initiated. The patients used the dental appliance on average 6 nights/week. After 12 months of treatment, the apnoea, apnoea/hypopnoea, oxygen desaturation, and snoring indices decreased significantly. Ninety-five per cent of the patients reduced their apnoea index by > or = 50% and 78% of the patients were normalised following treatment. At the somnographic registration without the dental appliance, the values were found comparable to what they were before treatment. Mandibular mobility and occlusion were constant throughout the study. The adverse events resulting from using the dental appliance were relatively minor and infrequent, and no serious complications were observed except for two patients who reported pain from the temporomandibular joint. In conclusion, the dental appliance has been shown to be a valuable treatment method for mild to moderate OSA with few adverse events in the stomatognathic system or other complications. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of Herbst and Twin-block appliances for established Class II Division I malocclusion. The study was a multicenter, randomized clinical trial carried out in orthodontic departments in the United Kingdom. A total of 215 patients (aged 11-14 years) were randomized to receive treatment with either the Herbst or the Twin-block appliance. Treatment with the Herbst appliance resulted in a lower failure-to-complete rate for the functional appliance phase of treatment (12.9%) than did treatment with Twin-block (33.6%). There were no differences in treatment time between appliances, but significantly more appointments (3) were needed for repair of the Herbst appliance than for the Twin-block. There were no differences in skeletal and dental changes between the appliances; however, the final occlusal result and skeletal discrepancy were better for girls than for boys. Because of the high cooperation rates of patients using it, the Herbst appliance could be the appliance of choice for treating adolescents with Class II Division 1 malocclusion. The trade-off for use of the Herbst is more appointments for appliance repair. This study evaluated the effectiveness of early orthodontic treatment with the Twin-block appliance for the developing Class II Division 1 malocclusion. This multicenter trial was carried out in the United Kingdom. A total of 174 children, aged 8 to 10 years old, with Class II Division 1 malocclusion were randomly allocated to receive treatment with a Twin-block appliance or to an untreated, control group. Data were collected at the start of the study and 15 months later. Results showed that early treatment with Twin-block appliances resulted in reduction of overjet, correction of molar relationships, and reduction in severity of malocclusion. Most of this correction was due to dentoalveolar change, but some was due to favorable skeletal change. Early treatment with the Twin-block appliance is effective in reducing overjet and severity of malocclusion. The small change in the skeletal relationship might not be considered clinically significant. To evaluate the clinical usefulness and tolerability of an oral jaw-positioning appliance in the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea syndrome in children, we studied 32 patients (mean age, 7.1 +/- 2.6 yr; 20 males) with symptoms of obstructive sleep apnea, malocclusion, and a baseline apnea index > 1 event/h. A group of 19 subjects was randomly assigned to a 6-mo trial of an oral appliance; the remainder acted as control subjects. At baseline and after the trial all patients underwent physical examination, a standard polysomnography, and orthodontic assessment. A modified version of the Brouillette questionnaire related to obstructive sleep apnea symptoms was administered to parents before and after the trial and a clinical score was calculated. Of the 32 subjects enrolled, 4 treated subjects and 5 control subjects were lost to follow-up. Polysomnography after the trial showed that treated subjects all had significantly lower apnea index (p < 0.001) and hypopnea index values (p < 0.001) than before the trial, whereas in untreated control subjects these values remained almost unchanged. Clinical assessment before and after treatment showed that in 7 of the 14 subjects (50%) the oral appliance had reduced (a fall of at least 2 points in the respiratory score) and in 7 had resolved the main respiratory symptoms, whereas untreated patients continued to have symptoms. In conclusion, treatment of obstructive sleep apnea syndrome with an oral appliance in children with malocclusion is effective and well tolerated. The aims of this study were, first, to determine in children with Class II, division 1 malocclusions treated with functional appliances if, according to the Peer Assessment Rating (PAR) Index, lower incisor proclination affects the assessment of treatment outcome; and, second, to evaluate the effectiveness of such treatment before and after adjustment for any lower incisor proclination. Fifty-one children (32M, 19F; age and gender matched; 10 to 13 years) were randomly assigned to either an untreated group, one treated with Fränkel function regulators or one treated with Harvold activators. Study casts were assessed at the start, and after 6, 12, and 18 months of treatment/observation. The inclination of the upper and lower incisors was measured on lateral cephalometric radiographs taken at the start and 18 months later. There was wide variation in treatment response. The PAR scores decreased by more than 30% in 33% of the Fränkel group and by 75% in the Harvold group. When the score was adjusted to remove the effects of lower incisor proclination on the overjet, the treatment outcomes were "worse/no different" in 66% and "improved" in 33%, in both groups. It was concluded that functional appliances be used only on selected cases. The obstructive sleep apnea-hypopnea syndrome (OSAHS) is a common sleep-related breathing disorder characterized by repetitive obstructions of the upper airway during sleep. The modification of pharyngeal patency by oral appliance therapy has been suggested as an alternative to various treatment modalities for OSAHS. To determine the evidence base with respect to the efficacy and comorbidity of the oral appliance therapy in OSAHS, a systematic review of the available literature was conducted. In addition, the preliminary results of a randomized parallel trial are reported on the effectiveness and specific indication of, respectively, the oral appliance and continuous positive airways pressure therapy in OSAHS. The purpose of this study was to evaluate skeletal and dental effects of bionator headgear combination appliances on patients in development period with Class II, division 1 malocclusion. The comparison of computerized X-ray cephalometric measurements between the 26 treated children and 26 untreated children was made. The results showed that ANB angle was significantly reduced and horizontal mandibular growth development tended to be normal in the treated group. It was suggested that the bionator headgear combination appliance can restrain the maxillary growth early and promote the forward mandibular growth which contribute the functional jaws correction.
At present there is no sufficient evidence to state that oral appliances or functional orthopaedic appliances are effective in the treatment of OSAS in children. Oral appliances or functional orthopaedic appliances may be helpful in the treatment of children with craniofacial anomalies which are risk factors for apnoea.