Grantee Research Project Results
Association of ventricular arrhythmias detected by implantable cardioverter defibrillator and ambient air pollutants in the St. Louis, Missouri metropolitan area.
Citation:
Rich DQ, Kim MH, Turner JR, Mittleman MA, Schwartz J, Catalano PJ, Dockery DW. Association of ventricular arrhythmias detected by implantable cardioverter defibrillator and ambient air pollutants in the St. Louis, Missouri metropolitan area. Occupational and Environmental Medicine 2006;63(9):591-596.
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: It has previously been reported that the risk of ventricular arrhythmias is positively associated with ambient air pollution among patients with implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) in Boston. AIMS: To assess the association of community exposures to air pollution with ventricular arrhythmias in a cohort of ICD patients in metropolitan St Louis, Missouri. METHODS: ICD detected episodes reported during clinical follow up were abstracted and reviewed by an electrophysiologist to identify ventricular arrhythmias. A total of 139 ventricular arrhythmias were identified among 56 patients. A case-crossover design was used with control periods matched on weekday and hour of the day within the same calendar month. Conditional logistic regression models were adjusted for temperature, barometric pressure, and relative humidity in the 24 hours preceding the event. RESULTS: There was a significant (24%, 95% CI 7% to 44%) increase in risk of ventricular arrhythmias associated with each 5 ppb increase in mean sulphur dioxide and non-significantly increased risk (22%, 95% CI -6% to 60%; and 18%, 95% CI -7% to 50%) associated with increases in nitrogen dioxide (6 ppb) and elemental carbon (0.5 microg/m3), respectively in the 24 hours before the arrhythmia. CONCLUSIONS: These results provide evidence of an association between ventricular arrhythmias and ambient air pollutants in St Louis. This is consistent with previous results from Boston, although the pollutants responsible for the increased risk are different.The perspectives, information and conclusions conveyed in research project abstracts, progress reports, final reports, journal abstracts and journal publications convey the viewpoints of the principal investigator and may not represent the views and policies of ORD and EPA. Conclusions drawn by the principal investigators have not been reviewed by the Agency.