ArticleSleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung2025
Cephalometric differences between patients with REM- and NREM-Predominant OSA: implications for selecting surgical candidates.
Article in Sleep & breathing = Schlaf & Atmung, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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
Abstract
purposeObstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a common disorder characterized by recurrent upper airway collapse, causing intermittent hypoxemia and sleep disruption. Various factors influence its occurrence and severity. This study aimed to examine the relationship between cephalometric anatomical features and polysomnographic data in patients with OSA.
methodsThis retrospective cohort study included 74 patients (61 male, 13 female) aged 18-78 years(mean ± SD: 52.9 ± 12.8 years), with BMI ranging 17.6-34 kg/m²(mean ± SD: 25.6 ± 3.1 kg/m²), diagnosed with OSA, who also underwent cephalometric, and panoramic radiographs. Patients were classified into positional OSA (n = 33, 28 males, 5 females), non-positional OSA (n = 41, 33 males, 8 females), REM-related OSA (n = 22, 14 males, 8 females) and NREM-related OSA (n = 52, 47 males, 5 females) based on polysomnographic data. The primary predictor variables were OSA subtype. The primary outcome variables included PSG data and lateral and posteroanterior cephalometric measurements. Group differences between OSA subtypes and correlation coefficient between PSG and cephalometric parameters were evaluated. Logistic regression analyses were performed to identify risk factor.
resultsNo significant differences in cephalometric and panoramic parameters were found between patients with POSA and NPOSA. NREM OSA patients had a longer N-ANS length, greater anterior hyoid-to-mandibular plane, and longer tongue length than REM OSA patients (p < 0.05). Logistic regression revealed that narrower nasal and maxillary widths (relative to mandibular width) were significant risk factors for NPOSA (95% CI, p < 0.05). A posteriorly and inferiorly positioned hyoid bone and a longer tongue length were associated with NREM OSA.
conclusionAnatomical factors, including nasal and maxillary width, hyoid bone position, and tongue length, are linked to OSA type. These findings may suggest that targeted treatments strategies, including MAD, MMA, genioglossus advancement, or transverse maxillary expansion, may be effective based on individual anatomical characteristics.
Indexed as
Identifiers
41055679What 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.