{"title":"Clinical perspective on non-sleepy obstructive sleep apnea; to treat or not to treat?","authors":"Steven Luu, Budhima Nanayakkara, Brendon J Yee","doi":"10.1080/17476348.2025.2539542","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Excessive daytime sleepiness has traditionally been regarded as the hallmark symptom of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), yet nearly half of individuals with OSA do not report significant sleepiness. While treatments are well established for sleepy patients, their role in non-sleepy individuals remains relatively underexplored.</p><p><strong>Areas covered: </strong>This review discusses the limitations of current tools used to measure sleepiness, evaluates the evidence for various treatment options for OSA in non-sleepy populations, and outlines key considerations for shared decision-making. We examine noninvasive therapies including positive airway pressure (PAP), oral appliance therapy, and weight loss interventions only.</p><p><strong>Expert opinion: </strong>Randomized controlled trials have not demonstrated cardiometabolic benefits of PAP therapy in non-sleepy individuals with OSA, though these studies are limited by poor PAP adherence and imprecise tools for identifying high-risk patients. As such, a pragmatic trial of PAP may be a reasonable strategy in non-sleepy people with moderate-to-severe OSA, cardiovascular comorbidities, or other OSA-related complications; provided patients are counseled about the challenges of adherence and the uncertain benefits in this population. Looking ahead, management of non-sleepy OSA will likely be guided by individualized, risk-based approaches incorporating physiological endotyping, objective biomarkers of cardiovascular risk, and patient preferences.</p>","PeriodicalId":94007,"journal":{"name":"Expert review of respiratory medicine","volume":" ","pages":"1-13"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Expert review of respiratory medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/17476348.2025.2539542","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Introduction: Excessive daytime sleepiness has traditionally been regarded as the hallmark symptom of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA), yet nearly half of individuals with OSA do not report significant sleepiness. While treatments are well established for sleepy patients, their role in non-sleepy individuals remains relatively underexplored.
Areas covered: This review discusses the limitations of current tools used to measure sleepiness, evaluates the evidence for various treatment options for OSA in non-sleepy populations, and outlines key considerations for shared decision-making. We examine noninvasive therapies including positive airway pressure (PAP), oral appliance therapy, and weight loss interventions only.
Expert opinion: Randomized controlled trials have not demonstrated cardiometabolic benefits of PAP therapy in non-sleepy individuals with OSA, though these studies are limited by poor PAP adherence and imprecise tools for identifying high-risk patients. As such, a pragmatic trial of PAP may be a reasonable strategy in non-sleepy people with moderate-to-severe OSA, cardiovascular comorbidities, or other OSA-related complications; provided patients are counseled about the challenges of adherence and the uncertain benefits in this population. Looking ahead, management of non-sleepy OSA will likely be guided by individualized, risk-based approaches incorporating physiological endotyping, objective biomarkers of cardiovascular risk, and patient preferences.