4.6 Article

The association between sleep characteristics and prothrombotic markers in a population-based sample: Chicago Area Sleep Study

期刊

SLEEP MEDICINE
卷 15, 期 8, 页码 973-978

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.sleep.2014.04.005

关键词

Sleep duration; Sleep apnea; Hemostatic factors; Procoagulants; Population studies; Cardiovascular disease

资金

  1. National Heart, Lung and Blood Institute/National Institutes of Health [R01HL092140]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background and aim: Short sleep duration and poor quality sleep are associated with coronary heart disease (CHD) mortality; however, the underlying pathophysiologic process remains unclear. Sleep apnea may confound the association because of its relationship with formation of thrombi, the vascular occlusive process in CHD. We tested whether sleep duration and quality were associated with prothrombotic biomarkers in adults with a low probability of apnea. Methods: We included adults aged 35-64 years recruited from the community and who had an apnea hypopnea index <15 after one night of screening (n = 506). Sleep duration and maintenance were determined from 7 days of wrist actigraphy; daytime sleepiness was estimated using the Epworth Sleepiness Scale. Factor VIII (FVIII), von Willebrand factor (vWF), thrombin antithrombin (TAT) complexes, and plasminogen activator inhibitor-1 (PAI-1) were measured in fasting blood. Results: Sleep duration, maintenance, and daytime sleepiness were not associated with FVIII, vWf, or TAT. Sleep maintenance was modestly inversely associated with higher levels of log-transformed PAI-1 (beta = -0.07, standard error (SE) = 0.03 per 4.8%, p = 0.04) following adjustment for demographic characteristics, cardiovascular risk factors, and body mass index (BMI). Conclusions: Mild impairment in sleep was modestly associated with activation of coagulation; further study is needed to evaluate the role of fibrinolytic factors in sleep-mediated coronary thrombosis. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. 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

4.6
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