Skip to main content
. 2023 Mar 21;45:101198. doi: 10.1016/j.ijcha.2023.101198

Table 2.

Comparison of data between HCM patients with or without abnormal venous residual volume fraction.

Abnormal RVFv
(n = 9)
Normal RVFv
(n = 21)
p
Men 67% 67% 0.89
Age 64 ± 9 60 ± 13 0.29
Body mass index 31.2 ± 4.6 28.5 ± 4.9 0.17
Height, cm 169 ± 11 166 ± 8 0.41
Systolic blood pressure, mmHg 135 ± 13 137 ± 21 0.85
NYHA functional class 2.3 ± 0.5 2.3 ± 0.5 0.81
Brain Natriuretic Peptide 377 ± 388 312 ± 507 0.74
Elevated Von Willebrand factor 56% 26% < 0.05
Maximal LV wall thickness, mm) 17.3 ± 2.0 18.1 ± 2.5 0.36
Left ventricular ejection fraction, % 68.9 ± 7.3 70.1 ± 7.8 0.68
Global longitudinal strain, % 15.3 ± 4.5 15.6 ± 4.2 0.89
Left ventricular end-diastolic volume index, ml/m2 40.1 ± 9.0 50.2 ± 10.6 0.02
Max LVOTO gradient, mmHg 59.4 ± 31.0 65.9 ± 31.4 0.61
Mean E/E’ 12.0 ± 2.6 11.5 ± 4.7 0.67
Left atrial volume index, mm/m2 49.8 ± 16.5 53.9 ± 18.3 0.55
Vena cava expirium diameter, mm 16.3 ± 6.2 15.8 ± 6.0 0.82
Systolic pulmonary artery pressure, mmHg 34.4 ± 12.8 33.2 ± 7.9 0.78

Data are expressed in mean ± SD or n (%), RVFv = venous residual volume fraction.