In page 47 of Mandl and Shaw, the $\Delta$-function can be written as $$ \Delta(x) = \frac{-1}{(2 \pi)^3} \int \frac{d^3k}{\omega_k} \sin(kx) \tag{3.43} $$ and as equation $$ \Delta(x) = \frac{-i}{(2 \pi)^3} \int d^4k\delta(k^2-\mu^2) \epsilon(k_0) e^{-ikx} \tag{3.45} $$ where $\epsilon(x)$ is the sign function. The book states that both definitions are equivalent if we perform a $k_0$-integration on (3.45), using relation $$ \delta(k^2-\mu^2) = \frac{1}{2 \omega_k} \left[\delta(k_0 + \omega_k) + \delta(k_0 - \omega_k)\right] \tag{3.47} $$
I want to prove this, but don't know how to perform the integration in order to get equation (3.43). I have to compute $$ \Delta(x) = \frac{-i}{(2 \pi)^3} \int d^4k \frac{1}{2 \omega_k} \left[\delta(k_0 + \omega_k) + \delta(k_0 - \omega_k)\right] \epsilon(k_0) e^{-ikx} $$ but this becomes $$ \Delta(x) = \frac{-i}{(2 \pi)^3} \int d^3k \frac{1}{2 \omega_k} \left[e^{-i\omega_kt} - e^{ i \omega_k t}\right] e^{i \vec{k} \cdot \vec{x}} = \frac{-1}{(2 \pi)^3} \int d^3k \frac{1}{\omega_k} \sin(\omega_kt) e^{i \vec{k} \cdot \vec{x}} $$
So there is no way I can relate this result to $\sin(kx)$ of equation (3.43) with the spatial part $e^{i \vec{k} \cdot \vec{x}}$. Where is the mistake on my calculations?