Mandibular Advancement Device Treatment Efficacy Is Associated with Polysomnographic Endotypes.

Rationale: Mandibular advancement device (MAD) treatment efficacy varies among patients with obstructive sleep apnea.Objectives: The current study aims to explain underlying individual differences in efficacy using obstructive sleep apnea endotypic traits calculated from baseline clinical polysomnography: collapsibility (airflow at normal ventilatory drive), loop gain (drive response to reduced airflow), arousal threshold (drive preceding arousal), compensation (increase in airflow as drive increases), and the ventilatory response to arousal (increase in drive explained by arousal). On the basis of previous research, we hypothesized that responders to MAD treatment have a lower loop gain and milder collapsibility.Methods: Thirty-six patients (median apnea-hypopnea index [AHI], 23.5 [interquartile range (IQR), 19.7-29.8] events/h) underwent baseline and 3-month follow-up full polysomnography, with MAD fixed at 75% of maximal protrusion. Traits were estimated using baseline polysomnography according to Sands and colleagues. Response was defined as an AHI reduction ≥ 50%.Results: MAD treatment significantly reduced AHI (49.7%baseline [23.9-63.6], median [IQR]). Responders exhibited lower loop gain (mean [95% confidence interval], 0.53 [0.48-0.58] vs. 0.65 [0.57-0.73]; P = 0.020) at baseline than nonresponders, a difference that persisted after adjustment for baseline AHI and body mass index. Elevated loop gain remained associated with nonresponse after adjustment for collapsibility (odds ratio, 3.03 [1.16-7.88] per 1-standard deviation (SD) increase in loop gain [SD, 0.15]; P = 0.023).Conclusions: MAD nonresponders exhibit greater ventilatory instability, expressed as higher loop gain. Assessment of the baseline degree of ventilatory instability using this approach may improve upfront MAD treatment patient selection.Clinical trial registered with www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT01532050).