Evidence Hub

Rapid Eye Movement (REM)-Predominant Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA) Coexisting With and Initially Obscuring Narcolepsy Type 1: A Nine-Year Longitudinal Case Report

Bouhamdi A, Aalil S, Chefchaou Y, Labyad S, Benjelloun M, Abida A, Souirti Z, Serraj M et al.

Cureus, 2026

Abstract

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a common disorder whose clinical expression and daytime sleepiness may evolve over time, particularly in the presence of coexisting sleep disorders. We report a nine-year longitudinal case of a 29-year-old man presenting initially with severe excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) (Epworth Sleepiness Scale (ESS) score: 19/24) and mild OSA (apnea-hypopnea index (AHI): 10 events/h), who represented nine years later with disabling sleepiness, weight gain (body mass index: 30.2 kg/m²), and typical cataplexy. No documented sleep medicine follow-up or OSA treatment was available during the intervening nine-year period. Repeat polysomnography demonstrated moderate, rapid eye movement (REM)-predominant OSA (AHI: 20.4 events/h; REM-AHI: 52.9 events/h; non-REM (NREM)-AHI: 9.4 events/h; REM-AHI/NREM-AHI ratio: 5.6), with increased sleep fragmentation. The Multiple Sleep Latency Test (MSLT), performed after diagnostic polysomnography and before continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) optimization, showed severe objective sleepiness (mean sleep latency: 3.7 minutes) with sleep-onset REM periods in all five nap opportunities. In the setting of typical cataplexy, these findings strongly supported a diagnosis of narcolepsy type 1; however, untreated OSA and sleep fragmentation at the time of testing were acknowledged as potential confounders in the interpretation of the MSLT. Management included fixed-pressure CPAP at 8 cm H₂O, sertraline for cataplexy, and…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case report, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free