An evaluation of two different mandibular advancement devices on craniofacial characteristics and upper airway dimensions of Chinese adult obstructive sleep apnea patients

Abstract

Monoblock was the better MAD to improve OSA severity. No difference could be found in changes of subjective OSA indicators. Significant but similar cephalometric changes were observed, indicating both MADs alter the position of the surrounding musculature and improve upper airway patency. Therefore, the different design features of the MADs suggest an impact on some OSA indicators.

Practical considerations for effective oral appliance use in the treatment of obstructive sleep apnea: a clinical review

“…Zhou and Liu (2012) demonstrated different results with a monoblock versus twin-block appliance using the same jaw position during a single-night titration study. Similar interesting results have been reported in comparison studies of two different MADs (Geoghegan et al 2015;Isacsson et al 2016). Geoghegan et al (2015) evaluated the effects of two different MADs (monoblock and twinblock) with the same bite registration as used in the study by Zhou and Liu (2012) and found that monoblock appliances reduced the AHI more than twin-block appliances.…”

“…Similar interesting results have been reported in comparison studies of two different MADs (Geoghegan et al 2015;Isacsson et al 2016). Geoghegan et al (2015) evaluated the effects of two different MADs (monoblock and twinblock) with the same bite registration as used in the study by Zhou and Liu (2012) and found that monoblock appliances reduced the AHI more than twin-block appliances. Conversely, in another study comparing monoblock and twin-block appliances, Isacsson et al (2016) reported that both types significantly reduced the AHI and sleepiness to the same degree.…”

Therapeutic Efficacy of Twin‐Block and Fixed Oral Appliances in Patients with Obstructive Sleep Apnea Syndrome

“…The wide variability in the reported treatment efficacy of MSAs for OSA may be attributable to the wide variety of available designs . However, few studies have compared the efficacy between adjustable MASs allowing mouth opening and fixed MASs that maintain mouth closure . Mouth opening during sleep tends to induce backward movement of the mandible, tongue, and soft palate, which in turn narrow the oropharyngeal airspace .…”

“…Studies have compared fixed with twin‐block MAS designs . Bloch et al reported no difference in the reduction in AHI achieved with the two MAS types .…”

“…Studies have compared the efficacy of both types of MAS . A comparison of fixed and twin‐block MASs showed no differences with respect to apnea–hypopnea index (AHI) reduction or sleep improvement .…”