TY - JOUR
T1 - Maxillomandibular Advancement and Upper Airway Stimulation for Treatment of Obstructive Sleep Apnea
T2 - A Systematic Review
AU - Zhou, Ning
AU - Ho, Jean Pierre T.F.
AU - Spijker, René
AU - Aarab, Ghizlane
AU - de Vries, Nico
AU - Ravesloot, Madeline J.L.
AU - de Lange, Jan
N1 - Special Issue: Current Perspectives on the Treatment of Obstructive Sleep Apnea - Part II.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 by the authors.
PY - 2022/11/2
Y1 - 2022/11/2
N2 - This systematic review aimed to comparatively evaluate the efficacy and safety of maxillomandibular advancement (MMA) and upper airway stimulation (UAS) in obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) treatment. A MEDLINE and Embase database search of articles on MMA and/or UAS for OSA was conducted. Twenty-one MMA studies and nine UAS studies were included. All the MMA studies demonstrated a reduction in apnea hypopnea index (AHI) postoperatively, and success rates ranged from 41.1% to 100%. Ten MMA studies reported pre- and postoperative Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS), and all but one study demonstrated a reduction in ESS. In the UAS studies, all but one demonstrated a reduction in AHI, and success rates ranged from 26.7% to 77.8%. In the eight UAS studies reporting pre- and postoperative ESS, an ESS reduction was demonstrated. No studies reported any deaths related to MMA or UAS. The most common postoperative complications after MMA and UAS were facial paresthesia in the mandibular area and discomfort due to electrical stimulation, respectively. This systematic review suggests that both MMA and UAS are effective and generally safe therapies for OSA. However, due to the limitations of the included studies, there is no evidence yet to directly compare these two procedures in OSA treatment.
AB - This systematic review aimed to comparatively evaluate the efficacy and safety of maxillomandibular advancement (MMA) and upper airway stimulation (UAS) in obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) treatment. A MEDLINE and Embase database search of articles on MMA and/or UAS for OSA was conducted. Twenty-one MMA studies and nine UAS studies were included. All the MMA studies demonstrated a reduction in apnea hypopnea index (AHI) postoperatively, and success rates ranged from 41.1% to 100%. Ten MMA studies reported pre- and postoperative Epworth sleepiness scale (ESS), and all but one study demonstrated a reduction in ESS. In the UAS studies, all but one demonstrated a reduction in AHI, and success rates ranged from 26.7% to 77.8%. In the eight UAS studies reporting pre- and postoperative ESS, an ESS reduction was demonstrated. No studies reported any deaths related to MMA or UAS. The most common postoperative complications after MMA and UAS were facial paresthesia in the mandibular area and discomfort due to electrical stimulation, respectively. This systematic review suggests that both MMA and UAS are effective and generally safe therapies for OSA. However, due to the limitations of the included studies, there is no evidence yet to directly compare these two procedures in OSA treatment.
KW - hypoglossal nerve
KW - maxillomandibular surgery
KW - obstructive sleep apnea
KW - systematic review
KW - therapy
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85142333394&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85142333394&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.3390/jcm11226782
DO - 10.3390/jcm11226782
M3 - Review article
AN - SCOPUS:85142333394
SN - 2077-0383
VL - 11
SP - 1
EP - 16
JO - Journal of Clinical Medicine
JF - Journal of Clinical Medicine
IS - 22
M1 - 6782
ER -