Environmental noise exposure is associated with atherothrombotic risk
There is growing evidence that environmental noise exposure could increase the risk of atherothrombotic events, including acute myocardial infarction (MI). We analysed the burden of environmental noise on atherothrombotic risk in MI patients. From the RICO survey, 879 consecutive MI patients include...
Saved in:
| Published in: | Scientific reports Vol. 12; no. 1; pp. 3151 - 11 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
London
Nature Publishing Group UK
24.02.2022
Nature Publishing Group Nature Portfolio |
| Subjects: | |
| ISSN: | 2045-2322, 2045-2322 |
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | There is growing evidence that environmental noise exposure could increase the risk of atherothrombotic events, including acute myocardial infarction (MI). We analysed the burden of environmental noise on atherothrombotic risk in MI patients. From the RICO survey, 879 consecutive MI patients included from 2004 to 2008 and living in an urban unit of > 237,000 inhabitants were analysed. Atherothrombotic risk was calculated using the TRS-2P score. TRS-2P categories were split into low (TRS-2P = 0/1) (40.8%), medium–low (TRS-2P = 2) (25.7%), medium–high (TRS-2P = 3) (21.8%) and high risk (TRS-2P ≥ 4) (11.6%). Noise exposure was associated with atherothrombotic risk, with the L
Aeq,24 h
(OR (95% CI): 1.165 (1.026–1.324)) and L
night
(OR (95CI): 1.157 (1.031–1.298)), for each 10 dB(A) increase. After adjustment, noise exposure remained a predictor of atherothrombotic risk, with L
Aeq,24 h
(OR (95% CI): 1.162 (1.011–1.337)) and with L
night
(OR (95% CI): 1.159 (1.019–1.317)). The relationship with transportation L
night
was significant for men (OR (95% CI): 1.260 (1.078–1.472)) but not for women (OR (95% CI): 0.959 (0.763–1.205)). We found a significant association between residential traffic noise exposure and atherothrombotic risk in men but not in women. These results could have major consequences for secondary prevention. |
|---|---|
| Bibliography: | ObjectType-Article-1 SourceType-Scholarly Journals-1 ObjectType-Feature-2 content type line 14 content type line 23 PMCID: PMC8873564 |
| ISSN: | 2045-2322 2045-2322 |
| DOI: | 10.1038/s41598-022-06825-0 |