4.8 Article

Ambient pollution and heart rate variability

期刊

CIRCULATION
卷 101, 期 11, 页码 1267-1273

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1161/01.CIR.101.11.1267

关键词

nervous system, autonomic; heart rate; epidemiology; electrophysiology; air pollution

资金

  1. NIEHS NIH HHS [ES0639, ES0002, K07-ES00266] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background-We investigated associations between ambient pollution levels and cardiovascular function in a repeated measures study including 163 observations on twenty-one 53- to 87-year-old active Boston residents observed up to 12 times from June to September 1997. Particles with aerodynamic diameter less than or equal to 2.5 mu m (PM,,) were measured continuously using a tapered element oscillating microbalance. Methods and Results-The protocol involved 25 minutes per week of continuous Holter ECG monitoring, including 5 minutes of rest, 5 minutes of standing, 5 minutes of exercise outdoors, 5 minutes of recovery, and 20 cycles of slow breathing, Heart rate variability (HRV) was assessed through time domain variables: the standard deviation of normal RR intervals (SDNN) and the square root of the mean of the squared differences between adjacent normal RR intervals (r-MSSD). Mean 4-hour PM2.5 levels ranged from 3 to 49 mu g/m(3); 1-hour ozone levels ranged from 1 to 77 ppb, In multivariate analyses, significantly less HRV (SDNN and r-MSSD) was associated with elevated PM2.5. During slow breathing, a reduction in r-MSSD of 6.1 ms was associated with an interquartile (14.3 mu g/m(3)) increase in PM2.5 during the hour of and the 3 hours previous to the Holter session (P=0.006). During slow breathing, a multiple pollution model was associated with a reduction in r-MSSD of 5.4 ms (P=0.02) and 5.5 ms (P=0.03) for interquartile changes in PM2.5 and ozone, respectively, resulting in a combined effect equivalent to a 33% reduction in the mean r-MSSD. Conclusions-Particle and ozone exposure may decrease vagal tone, resulting in reduced HRV.

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

4.8
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