4.6 Article

Effect of positive airway pressure therapy of obstructive sleep apnea on circulating Angiopoietin-2

期刊

SLEEP MEDICINE
卷 96, 期 -, 页码 119-121

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.sleep.2022.05.007

关键词

Obstructive sleep apnea; Positive airway pressure; Angiopoietin-2; Lung injury

资金

  1. NIH [R01 HL137234, R01 HL106041, R35 HL135818, K23HL150301, RC2 HL101417, U34 HL105277]
  2. Pulmonary Fibrosis Foundation Scholars Award

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study assessed the impact of positive airway pressure (PAP) therapy on alveolar epithelial and endothelial injury and extracellular matrix remodeling in patients with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA). The findings suggest a possible adverse impact of PAP therapy on vascular endothelium.
Background: Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) has been identified as a possible contributor to interstitial lung disease. While positive airway pressure (PAP) is effective therapy for OSA, it causes large increases in lung volumes during the night that are potentially deleterious, analogous to ventilator-induced lung injury, although this has not been previously studied. The goal of this study was to assess the impact of PAP therapy on four biomarkers of alveolar epithelial and endothelial injury and extracellular matrix remodeling in patients with OSA. Methods: In 82 patients with moderate to severe OSA who were adherent to PAP therapy, surfactant protein D, osteopontin, angiopoietin-2, and matrix metalloprotease-7 were measured by ELISA in serum samples collected before and 3-to 6-months after initiation of PAP therapy. Results: An increase in angiopoietin-2 level of 0.28 ng/mL following PAP therapy was observed (p = 0.007). This finding was replicated in an independent sample of OSA patients. No significant change was detected in surfactant protein D, osteopontin, or matrix metalloprotease-7. Conclusions: This finding raises concern for a possible adverse impact of PAP therapy on vascular endothelium. Published by Elsevier B.V.

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