| Literature DB >> 33132656 |
Ho Seok Seo1, Jinwook Hong2, Jaehun Jung2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD) is a highly prevalent disease of the upper gastrointestinal tract, and it is associated with environmental and lifestyle habits. Due to an increasing interest in the environment, several groups are studying the effects of meteorological factors and air pollutants (MFAPs) on disease development. AIM: To identify MFAPs effect on GERD-related medical utilization.Entities:
Keywords: Air pollution; Carbon monoxide; Gastroesophageal reflux disease; Meteorological factor; Particulate matter
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33132656 PMCID: PMC7584054 DOI: 10.3748/wjg.v26.i39.6074
Source DB: PubMed Journal: World J Gastroenterol ISSN: 1007-9327 Impact factor: 5.742
Summary statistics of the relationship of gastroesophageal reflux disease-related medical utilizations with meteorological factors and air pollutants
|
|
|
| ||||
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| Sex, | ||||||
| Male | 81687 (40.8) | |||||
| Female | 118313 (59.2) | |||||
| Age group, yr, | ||||||
| < 10 | 341 (0.17) | |||||
| 10-19 | 2402 (1.20) | |||||
| 20-29 | 6863 (3.43) | |||||
| 30-39 | 12477 (6.24) | |||||
| 40-49 | 23564 (11.78) | |||||
| 50-59 | 46228 (23.11) | |||||
| 60-69 | 49190 (24.60) | |||||
| 70-79 | 43077 (21.54) | |||||
| ≥ 80 | 15858 (7.93) | |||||
| Meteorological factors | ||||||
| Average temperature (°C) | 13.8 ± 9.8 | -13.7 | 5.4 | 15.2 | 22.4 | 33.1 |
| High temperature (°C) | 18.4 ± 10.0 | -10.7 | 10.1 | 20.2 | 27.0 | 38.8 |
| Low temperature (°C) | 10.0 ± 10.0 | -17.1 | 1.0 | 10.9 | 18.9 | 28.8 |
| Diurnal temperature Range (°C) | 8.4 ± 3.3 | 0.0 | 6.3 | 8.3 | 10.5 | 23.4 |
| Vapor pressure (hPa) | 12.2 ± 8.5 | 0.0 | 4.7 | 10.4 | 18.7 | 38.3 |
| Solar radiation (MJ/m2) | 12.6 ± 7.3 | 0.0 | 7.2 | 12.2 | 18.3 | 33.0 |
| Sunshine duration (hr) | 12.0 ± 2.3 | 9.7 | 10.5 | 12.2 | 13.9 | 14.8 |
| Wind speed (m/s) | 2.5 ± 1.1 | 0.0 | 1.8 | 2.4 | 3.1 | 10.1 |
| Daily rain (mm) | 3.2 ± 12.5 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.3 | 310.0 |
| Dew point temperature (°C) | 6.3 ± 11.6 | -25.9 | -3.0 | 7.3 | 16.4 | 28.2 |
| Humidity (%) | 62.1 ± 18.6 | 0.0 | 49.9 | 63.3 | 75.5 | 100.0 |
| Daily snow (cm) | 0.1 ± 0.9 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 0.0 | 29.2 |
| Cloud (1/10) | 4.5 ± 3.2 | 0.0 | 1.6 | 4.5 | 7.4 | 10.0 |
| Air pollutants | ||||||
| PM2.5 (μg/m3) | 15.9 ± 16.1 | 0.0 | 3.0 | 14.0 | 26.0 | 99.0 |
| PM10 (μg/m3) | 46.6 ± 25.9 | 0.0 | 31.2 | 42.6 | 57.0 | 1025.4 |
|
| 23.7 ± 11.6 | 0.0 | 15.4 | 23.0 | 31.3 | 83.8 |
| NO2 (ppb) | 28.2 ± 12.6 | 0.0 | 18.9 | 26.4 | 35.5 | 94.9 |
| SO2 (ppb) | 5.1 ± 2.1 | 0.0 | 3.8 | 4.9 | 6.2 | 25.8 |
| CO (ppm) | 0.5 ± 0.2 | 0.0 | 0.4 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 2.2 |
An 8 h maximum was used for O3. SD: Standard deviation; PM2.5: Particulate matter with a diameter ≤ 2.5 µm; PM10: Particulate matter with a diameter ≤ 10 µm; NO2: Nitrogen dioxide; SO2: Sulphur dioxide; CO: Carbon monoxide; ppb: Parts-per-billion; ppm: Parts-per-million.
Figure 1Granger causality test of the relationship between meteorological factors and air pollutants and GERD-related medical utilization. A: Various meteorological factors and air pollutants (MFAPs) show a direct or indirect association with GERD-related medical utilization; B: Relationship between the five selected MFAPs and GERD-related medical utilization. All variables were significantly correlated except AT and WS. The five selected MFAPs were significantly correlated to GERD-related medical utilization. MFAPs: Meteorological factors and air pollutants; GERD: Gastroesophageal reflux disease; WS: Wind speed; SD: Sunshine duration; AT: Average temperature; CO: Carbon monoxide; PM2.5: Particulate matter with a diameter ≤ 2.5 µm.
Figure 2Prediction model of gastroesophageal reflux disease -related medical utilization using a univariate generalized additive Poisson regression model. A: Gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD)-related medical utilizations with AT; B: GERD-related medical utilizations as with particulate matter with a diameter ≤ 2.5 µm levels ≤ 40 μg/m3; C: GERD-related medical utilizations in the range of the IQR for carbon monoxide. CO: Carbon monoxide; PM2.5: Particulate matter with a diameter ≤ 2.5 µm; ppm: Parts-per-million.
Figure 3Time lag for exposure in multivariate analyses. A: Excess risk was significant after exposure up until 8 d for average temperature; B: Excess risk was significant after exposure up until 9 d for wind speed; C: Excess risk was significant after exposure up until 6 d for sunshine duration; D: Excess risk was significant after exposure up until 9 d for particulate matter with a diameter ≤ 2.5 µm; E: Excess risk was significant after exposure up until 9 d for carbon monoxide. aP < 0.05. CO: Carbon monoxide; PM2.5: Particulate matter with a diameter ≤ 2.5 µm; ppm: Parts-per-million.
Figure 4Three-dimensional graph of the prediction model. Each graph shows excess risk according to factor and time lag. A: Average temperature; B: Wind speed; C: Sunshine duration; D: Particulate matter with a diameter ≤ 2.5 µm; E: Carbon monoxide. CO: Carbon monoxide; PM2.5: Particulate matter with a diameter ≤ 2.5 µm; ppm: Parts-per-million.