Obstructive sleep apnea mouth breathing phenotype response to combination oral appliance therapy

Preetam Schramm, Emet Schneiderman, Jason Hui, Zohre German, William Stenberg, Ju Ying Lin
{"title":"Obstructive sleep apnea mouth breathing phenotype response to combination oral appliance therapy","authors":"Preetam Schramm, Emet Schneiderman, Jason Hui, Zohre German, William Stenberg, Ju Ying Lin","doi":"10.3389/frsle.2024.1272726","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a multisystem physiological disorder of breathing during sleep that may contribute to systemic physiological imbalances and can also be exacerbated by the use of some commonly prescribed medications.In a randomized parallel design trial, we included phenotypic mild to severe OSA mouth-breathing subjects (n = 36) confirmed by home polygraphy, to evaluate the efficacy of oral appliance plus mouth shield and oral appliance only during sleep on night 1 (T1) after 4 weeks (T2), and after 8 weeks (T3) of oral appliance therapy. Respiratory dynamics data were collected. Primary outcomes were respiratory event index and mouth breathing. Anamnesis on medication intake was collected at enrollment.The respiratory event index and the hypopnea index did not statistically differ between groups at T3. Oral appliance plus mouth shield and oral appliance only significantly reduced mouth breathing at T2 (p = 0.012) and T3 (p ≤ 0.001) compared with baseline. Exploratory analyses showed oral appliance plus mouth shield supine respiratory rate at T3 (p = 0.039) was marginally decreased compared with oral appliance only. The snore percentage did not differ statistically between groups at T3. Oral appliance only showed a marginal oxygen saturation increase (p = 0.019) at T3 compared with oral appliance plus mouth shield. At T3, medication users had persistent respiratory events, mouth breathing, and snoring compared with non-medication users. Logistic regression showed medication use may increase the odds of mouth breathing (OR = 1.148; p = 0.015) and snoring (OR = 1.036; p = 0.049).In our OSA-mouth breathing cohort, oral appliance only was similar to oral appliance plus mouth shield in attenuating the respiratory event index, hypopnea index, and mouth breathing after 8 weeks. Oral appliance only increased oxygen saturation at T3, while oral appliance plus mouth shield maintained a relatively narrow oxygen saturation range from T1–3. Oral appliance plus mouth shield marginally lowered the supine respiratory rate at T3 compared with oral appliance only. Persistent respiratory events, mouth breathing, and snoring were observed in medication users at T3.","PeriodicalId":73106,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in sleep","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in sleep","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/frsle.2024.1272726","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a multisystem physiological disorder of breathing during sleep that may contribute to systemic physiological imbalances and can also be exacerbated by the use of some commonly prescribed medications.In a randomized parallel design trial, we included phenotypic mild to severe OSA mouth-breathing subjects (n = 36) confirmed by home polygraphy, to evaluate the efficacy of oral appliance plus mouth shield and oral appliance only during sleep on night 1 (T1) after 4 weeks (T2), and after 8 weeks (T3) of oral appliance therapy. Respiratory dynamics data were collected. Primary outcomes were respiratory event index and mouth breathing. Anamnesis on medication intake was collected at enrollment.The respiratory event index and the hypopnea index did not statistically differ between groups at T3. Oral appliance plus mouth shield and oral appliance only significantly reduced mouth breathing at T2 (p = 0.012) and T3 (p ≤ 0.001) compared with baseline. Exploratory analyses showed oral appliance plus mouth shield supine respiratory rate at T3 (p = 0.039) was marginally decreased compared with oral appliance only. The snore percentage did not differ statistically between groups at T3. Oral appliance only showed a marginal oxygen saturation increase (p = 0.019) at T3 compared with oral appliance plus mouth shield. At T3, medication users had persistent respiratory events, mouth breathing, and snoring compared with non-medication users. Logistic regression showed medication use may increase the odds of mouth breathing (OR = 1.148; p = 0.015) and snoring (OR = 1.036; p = 0.049).In our OSA-mouth breathing cohort, oral appliance only was similar to oral appliance plus mouth shield in attenuating the respiratory event index, hypopnea index, and mouth breathing after 8 weeks. Oral appliance only increased oxygen saturation at T3, while oral appliance plus mouth shield maintained a relatively narrow oxygen saturation range from T1–3. Oral appliance plus mouth shield marginally lowered the supine respiratory rate at T3 compared with oral appliance only. Persistent respiratory events, mouth breathing, and snoring were observed in medication users at T3.
阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停口呼吸表型对组合口腔矫治器疗法的反应
阻塞性睡眠呼吸暂停(OSA)是一种多系统的睡眠呼吸生理紊乱,可能导致全身生理失衡,也可能因服用某些常用处方药而加重。在一项随机平行设计试验中,我们纳入了经家庭测谎仪确认的表型为轻度至重度 OSA 的口呼吸受试者(n = 36),以评估在口腔矫治器治疗 4 周后(T2)和 8 周后(T3)的第 1 天晚上(T1)和第 8 天晚上(T3)睡眠时使用口腔矫治器加护口罩和仅使用口腔矫治器的疗效。收集了呼吸动力学数据。主要结果是呼吸事件指数和口呼吸。在 T3 阶段,各组的呼吸事件指数和低通气指数没有统计学差异。与基线相比,口腔矫治器加护口罩组和仅口腔矫治器组在 T2(p = 0.012)和 T3(p ≤ 0.001)时明显减少了口呼吸。探索性分析显示,与仅使用口腔矫治器相比,T3(p = 0.039)时口腔矫治器加护口罩的仰卧呼吸率略有下降。在 T3 阶段,各组的打鼾比例没有统计学差异。与口腔矫治器加口罩组相比,仅使用口腔矫治器组在 T3 阶段的血氧饱和度略有增加(p = 0.019)。在 T3 阶段,与不使用药物的患者相比,使用药物的患者有持续的呼吸事件、口呼吸和打鼾。逻辑回归显示,使用药物可能会增加口呼吸(OR = 1.148; p = 0.015)和打鼾(OR = 1.036; p = 0.049)的几率。在我们的 OSA 口呼吸队列中,仅口腔矫治器与口腔矫治器加口罩在 8 周后减轻呼吸事件指数、低通气指数和口呼吸方面的效果相似。口腔矫治器仅在 T3 阶段提高了血氧饱和度,而口腔矫治器加护口罩则在 T1-3 阶段保持了相对较窄的血氧饱和度范围。与仅使用口腔矫治器相比,口腔矫治器加嘴罩在 T3 阶段略微降低了仰卧呼吸频率。在 T3 阶段,用药者出现了持续呼吸事件、口呼吸和打鼾。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
文献相关原料
公司名称 产品信息 采购帮参考价格
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信