Trial reportSleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung2025
Prediction of non-responders to oral appliance treatment of obstructive sleep apnea: a pilot study.
Trial report in Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05987618 (Oral Appliances With and Without Elastic Bands to Treat Obstructive Sleep Apnea), which is not on this map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Oral Appliances With and Without Elastic Bands to Treat Obstructive Sleep Apnea: A Randomized Crossover Trial
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
purposeSeveral clinically available variables have been identified as predictors of non-response to oral appliance (OA) treatment, including endotypical traits such as severe upper airway collapsibility, unstable ventilatory control, and low arousal threshold. This study aimed to identify potential predictors of non-response to OA treatment in patients with OSA non-adherent to treatment with positive airway pressure.
methodsPatients in this study were initially treated with OAs with and without elastic bands in a crossover design. Subsequently, each patient selected their preferred treatment modality for continued therapy based on subjective preferences. The chosen OA treatment. The chosen OA treatment modality was titrated optimally based on reduction of REI. Patients not reaching > 50% reduction of REI from baseline were classified as non-responders. Statistical analyses were conducted using Student's t-test and Pearson's chi-squared test to assess differences in baseline variables between responders and non-responders, and logistic regression analyses were performed to investigate variables associated with not responding to OA treatment.
resultsOverall, 63.2% (n = 36) of the patients were responders to OA treatment following titration. Smaller distance from habitual bite position to maximal retruded position (Odds ratio: 0.28, p = 0.016), positional OSA (Odds ratio: 0.94, p = 0.024) and a higher number of the endotypical OSA traits severe collapsibility, high loop gain and low arousal threshold (Odds ratio: 7.41, p = 0.038), were found to predict non-response to OA treatment.
conclusionThese novel findings suggest that severe upper airway collapsibility, high loop gain and low arousal threshold, identified through clinically available variables, appear to be important predictors of non-response to OA treatment, along with short distance from habitual bite position to maximal retruded position and positional OSA. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05987618 (clinicaltrials.gov).
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.