View full-text article in PMC J Biomed Opt. 2018 Jan 19;23(1):016011. doi: 10.1117/1.JBO.23.1.016011 Search in PMC Search in PubMed View in NLM Catalog Add to search Copyright and License information © 2018 Society of Photo-Optical Instrumentation Engineers (SPIE) 1083-3668/2018/$25.00 © 2018 SPIE PMC Copyright notice Table 1. Mean difference±SEM of between groups’ comparisons for CF, dLVP, diaLVP, and RPP to evaluate the overall performance (min 1 to 90) by TC comparisons and recovery of hearts during early reperfusion phase (min 31 to 35) and final reperfusion injury phase (min 50 to 90). CF (ml/min) dLVP (mmHg) diaLVP (mmHg) RPP (HR × mmHg) TCirr versus Tcnon min 1 to 90 −2.23±0.67a −29.12±4.88a −0.11±3.57 −7835±2971a IRirr versus IRnon min 31 to 35 0.13±0.89 −15.93±5.26a −7.84±6.79 −2030±2501 min 50 to 90 0.20±0.73 −2.50±4.63 −5.55±5.78 −1381±2386 IRnon versus TCnon min 31 to 35 −2.01±0.94 −43.42±5.94a 37.40±7.12a −14,431±2623a min 50 to 90 −2.49±0.76a −32.60±4.85a 25.37±6.06a −10,840±2502a IRirr versus TCirr min 31to 35 0.27±1.09 −30.07±6.94a 29.56±8.31a −8769±3064a min 50 to 90 0.21±0.89 −15.50±5.67 20.42±7.08a −5646±2922 aIndicates significant difference.