4.5 Article

Effects of obstructive sleep apnea and its treatment on cardiovascular risk in CAD patients

期刊

RESPIRATORY MEDICINE
卷 105, 期 10, 页码 1557-1564

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.rmed.2011.05.010

关键词

Coronary artery disease; Continuous positive airway pressure; Obstructive sleep apnea; High sensitivity C-reactive protein

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study, in optimally treated CAD patients with newly diagnosed OSA, focused on (1) The relationships between OSA and serum biomarkers of four potential pathways of cardiovascular injury in OSA: high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hs-CRP), endothelin-1 (ET-1), N terminal pro B type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) and fibrinogen; and (2) The effect of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) therapy on these markers. 151 Chinese patients with proven CAD and standard medication were enrolled. After polysomnography, patients were classified into four groups according to apnea-hypopnea index (AHI): no OSA (n = 25); mild OSA (n = 50); moderate OSA (n = 43); severe OSA (n = 33). Morning levels of hs-CRP, ET-1, NT-proBNP and fibrinogen were assayed and repeated in severe OSA patients after 3-months CPAP treatment. Hs-CRP was greater in patients with severe OSA than those with no OSA or mild OSA (P = 0.001, P = 0.003; respectively). After adjustment for confounders, the hs-CRP levels correlated most strongly with AHI and oxygen desturation index (ODI) (r = 0.439, P < 0.001; r = 0.445, P < 0.001; respectively). In stepwise multiple linear regressions, the strongest predictor of hs-CRP levels was ODI (P < 0.001). After 3 months of CPAP treatment, the hs-CRP levels deceased (P = 0.005) in CAD patients with severe OSA. In CAD patients on current optimal medications, hs-CRP is significantly correlated with the severity of OSA, and the elevated hs-CRP levels can be decreased by CPAP. This suggests that OSA could activate vascular inflammation in CAD patients despite current best practice medications. (C) 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据