Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy of maxillomandibular advancement (MMA) for patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) with class 2 versus 3 dentofacial deformities (DFDs). STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. SETTING: Tertiary sleep surgery center. METHODS: Patients with OSA and DFD class 2 versus 3 undergoing MMA at Stanford Sleep Surgery between 2014 and 2021 were matched by preoperative body mass index (BMI), age, and sex. Postoperative outcome was compared with polysomnography measures and patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs). RESULTS: Twenty-eight matched subjects, 14 in each deformity group were identified and assessed. The mean age (standard deviation) was 34.29 (10.21) and 33.86 (10.23) for classes 2 and 3, respectively. The apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) decreased from 43.42 (28.30) to 9.6 (5.29) (p < .001) and 37.17 (35.77) to 11.81 (15.74) (p = .042) in class 2 and 3 subjects, respectively. The oxygen desaturation index (ODI) changed from 30.48 (24.02) to 6.88 (3.39) (p = .024) and 11.43 (11.40) to 5.44 (7.96) (p = .85) in class 2 and 3 subjects, respectively. The Epworth sleepiness scale changed from 8.93 (5.28) to 3.91 (2.70) (p = .018) and 10.23 (4.38) to 4.22 (3.07) (p = .006) in class 2 and 3 subjects, respectively. CONCLUSION: Among age, sex, and BMI-matched subjects, MMA is equally effective in both dentofacial class 2 and 3 groups, both objectively and subjectively. Preoperatively, dentofacial class 2 patients with OSA presented with the more severe disease with higher AHI and ODI. Dentofacial class 3 patients with OSA may require additional attention to improve nasal function outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Abdelwahab et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: