CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 28Obstructive Sleep Apnea ResearchNasal Surgery and Airway StudiesSleep and related disorders

Effects of Breathe Right™ on snoring: a polysomnographic study

Open access
Liistro, G., Rombaux, P., Dury, M., Pieters, T., Aubert, G., Rodenstein, D.O.·1998·Respiratory Medicine
DOI 10.1016/s0954-6111(98)90358-4
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

The nasal vestibule is a major site of resistance to airflow in healthy subjects. A high nasal resistance may increase snoring. Activation of the alae nasi and alar retraction reduce resistance to airflow and improve ventilation. The Breathe Right (BR) device has been proposed to reduce or eliminate snoring by improving nasal breathing. We assessed the efficacy of BR on sleep quality and snoring during 2 full-night polysomnographies, the first without and the second with BR. Ten non-apnoeic snorers were studied. Snoring was present during 22-98% of total sleep time during the control night. Ear-nose-throat examination disclosed a nasal valve anomaly in five subjects, objectivated by anterior and posterior rhinomanometry. Quality of sleep and snoring were not influenced by BR, even when different sleep stages were analysed separately. No difference in snoring index was found between snorers with or without nasal valve anomaly. We conclude that BR is ineffective in relieving snoring in non-apnoeic snorers.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0954-6111(98)90358-4

Cites

15 of 15 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Sleep architecture remains almost unchanged in patients with habitual snoring.

    “Sleep architecture remains almost unchanged in patients with habitual snoring 147, 149”

    From Non-CPAP therapies in obstructive sleep apnoea (2011) · cites this paper as [149]

    Table 1 (p. 1) shows no statistically significant differences in sleep-stage percentages between the control night and the Breathe Right trial night; the Results (p. 2) likewise report no significant difference in the measured polysomnographic variables. This supports little change in sleep architecture across those two nights, but only in the ten non-apnoeic snorers studied—not an unqualified statement about patients with habitual snoring. (LLM, conf=0.85)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

  • In another study, external nasal dilators did not influence snoring at all.

    “but in another study snoring was not influenced at all 149.”

    From Non-CPAP therapies in obstructive sleep apnoea (2011) · cites this paper as [149]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 3

  1. [6]6. Hoffstein V. Snoring. Chest 1996; 109: 201–222.
  2. [9]9. Lugaresi E, Cirignotta F, Coccagna G, Montagna P. Clinical significance of snoring. In Saunders N, Sullivan C, eds. Sleep and Breathing. New-York: Dekker, 1984: 283–298.
  3. [16]16. Nepomuceno DJ, Sullivan L, Carlson DM. The effect of an external nasal dilator on total inspiratory airway resistance. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 1997; 155: A677 [Abstract].

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Related

Authors
Liistro, G., Rombaux, P., Dury, M., Pieters, T., Aubert, G., & Rodenstein, D. O.
Affiliations
Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc (BE)
ORCID
Venue
Respiratory Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1998-08
Volume
92
Issue
8
Pages
1076-1078
ISSN
0954-6111 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/s0954-6111(98)90358-4
OpenAlex
W1995578512
Cited by
28
References
15
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2023: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 1 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 2
FWCI
0.61
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
Locations
  • Respiratory Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Digital Access to Libraries (Université catholique de Louvain (UCL), l'Université de Namur (UNamur) and the Université Saint-Louis (USL-B)) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Obstructive Sleep Apnea Research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Nasal Surgery and Airway Studies
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Sleep and related disorders
Keywords
snoring, nasal valve collapse, nasal resistance, alae nasi, alar retraction, nasal breathing, sleep quality, snoring index, rhinomanometry
MeSH terms
Adult, Airway Resistance, Dilatation, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Oxygen, Sleep Stages, Snoring, Body Mass Index, Polysomnography

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review