Snoring Remediation with Oral Appliance Therapy Potentially Reverses Cognitive Impairment: An Intervention Controlled Pilot Study

Respiration rate (RR) dynamics entrains brain neural networks. RR differences between mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and Alzheimer’s disease (AD) in response to oral appliance therapy (OAT) is unknown. This pilot study investigated if RR during stable sleep shows a relationship to pathological severity in subjects with MCI and AD who snore and if RR is influenced following stabilization of the upper airway using OAT. The study cohort was as follows: cognitively normal (CN; n = 14), MCI (n = 14) and AD (n = 9); and a sub-population receiving intervention, CN (n = 5), MCI (n = 7), AD (n = 6) subjects. The intervention used was an oral appliance plus a mouth shield (Tx). RR maximum (max) rate (breaths/minute) and RR fluctuation during 2116 stable sleep periods were measured. The Montreal cognitive assessment (MoCA) was administered before and after 4 weeks with Tx. Baseline data showed significantly higher RR fluctuation in CN vs. AD (p < 0.001) but not between CN vs. MCI (p = 0.668). Linear mixed model analysis indicated Tx effect (p = 0.008) for RR max. Tx after 4 weeks lowered the RR-max in MCI (p = 0.022) and AD (p < 0.001). Compared with AD RR max, CN (p < 0.001) and MCI (p < 0.001) were higher with Tx after 4 weeks. Some MCI and AD subjects improved executive and memory function after 4 weeks of Tx.

Oral Appliances for OSA Treatment: Meeting the Quadruple Aim

ABSTRACT Introduction In order to better treat obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in a more efficient and cost-effective way, a joint program between dental clinics and the sleep medicine clinic was piloted at Fort Hood, Texas. Obstructive sleep apnea negatively affects soldier readiness and deployability, leading to the need to establish a successful and proven workflow to treat these patients with oral appliance therapy (OAT). Materials and Methods We performed a retrospective review of a de-identified data set which included 288 patients from July 2016 to July 2020. Projected cost data were obtained from routinely collected sleep clinic positive airway pressure (PAP) data. Data were analyzed to determine treatment success and potential cost savings using OAT versus continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP). Patient workflow including successes and challenges with the program is summarized. Results About 85.5% of patients met criteria for successful control of their OSA using OAT as treatment. Five patients did not tolerate OAT and switched back to CPAP. A higher (less severe) O2 nadir on diagnostic polysomnography is moderately correlated with OAT success. Diagnostic Apnea–Hypopnea Index was inversely and weakly correlated with success. Two of the major challenges noted in the program were (1) loss of follow-up and (2) the length of time from oral appliance referral to fitting the oral appliance. If this program was successfully implemented at other Defense Health Agency (DHA) medical treatment facility (MTF) markets nationwide, a potential cost savings of over $500,000/year/MTF could be achieved. Conclusions Oral appliance therapy has the potential to increase both readiness and deployability for active duty soldiers. Using baseline O2 nadir can help predict success with OAT patients, determining which patients will benefit from this joint program between the dental and medical sleep clinics. Future studies can aim to establish an evidence-based pathway for clinic testing and follow-up. If this patient workflow is implemented properly, there can be significant cost savings army-wide. This all helps The United States Medical Command (MEDCOM) align with the DHA’s Quadruple Aim of increased readiness, better health, better care, and lower cost.

437 Efficacy of a novel oral appliance and the influence of OSA pathophysiological traits on treatment response

Introduction Oral appliance therapy is a recommended alternative to CPAP for OSA. Approximately 50% of patients have a major reduction in OSA severity but successful treatment outcome remains challenging to predict. Previous prediction methods have focused on clinical variables which have poor predictive value. OSA is recognised as a heterogenous disorder caused by 4 pathophysiological traits. The influence of OSA pathophysiological traits on oral appliance treatment outcome has been explored in recent physiological studies using simplified phenotyping methods. In this preliminary report, we prospectively compared differences in the 4 OSA phenotypes between responders and incomplete responders to a novel oral appliance with built in oral airway using gold standard phenotyping methodology. Methods Data from 22 people with OSA (AHI&gt;10events/h) have been analysed to date. A diagnostic in-laboratory PSG was initially conducted to confirm OSA. A detailed physiology PSG was carried out prior to commencement of oral appliance therapy. For this study night participants were instrumented with standard PSG equipment, nasal mask, pneumotachograph, epiglottic pressure catheter and intramuscular electrodes inserted perorally into the genioglossus to quantify baseline OSA phenotypic traits. Pcrit was quantified via CPAP dial downs and the non-anatomical traits were quantified from naturally occurring apneas and hypopneas. Participants were then fitted with a next generation novel oral appliance with a built-in oral airway (Oventus O2Vent Optima™) and titrated to at least 75% of maximum mandibular advancement. After acclimatization to therapy, participants were invited to undergo a treatment efficacy PSG. Results Oral appliance therapy reduced the AHI by 52% (21[15,31] vs. 11[7,16] events/h, p&lt;0.001). 46% of participants responded to oral appliance therapy based on the definition of AHI &lt; 10events/h. Preliminary analyses indicated that estimates of baseline upper airway collapsibility tended to be different in responders versus non-responders (responders have less collapsible airways). Conclusion The novel oral appliance reduced OSA severity by 50% with resolution of OSA in half of participants. Baseline pharyngeal collapsibility may be an important physiological predictor of treatment outcome. Support (if any):