Skip to main content
. 2018 Jul 11;22(9):4292–4303. doi: 10.1111/jcmm.13713

Table 2.

The echocardiographic and haemodynamic analysis of HSF1 TG mice and their littermates 1 wk after sham or LAD ligation

Sham MI
WT (n = 6) HSF1 TG (n = 6) WT (n = 6) HSF1 TG (n = 6)
LVAWd (mm) 0.73 ± 0.02 0.72 ± 0.02 1.18 ± 0.05b 1.16 ± 0.06
LVIDd (mm) 3.06 ± 0.3 3.03 ± 0.4 3.79 ± 0.5a 3.19 ± 0.4c
EF (%) 74.3 ± 5.9 75.8 ± 6.1 56.6 ± 4.1b 67.9 ± 6.1c
HR (bpm) 577.3 ± 47.3 571.0 ± 41.9 585.2 ± 49.5 579.5 ± 49.8
LVESP (mm Hg) 101.5 ± 8.3 103.8 ± 7.5 84.8 ± 6.5b 95.6 ± 9.1c
LVEDP (mm Hg) 1.4 ± 0.3 1.8 ± 0.4 9.1 ± 0.8b 5.1 ± 0.4c
Max dp/dt (mm Hg/S) 9959 ± 661.7 10011 ± 698.8 7002 ± 642.1a 8797 ± 660.5c
Min dp/dt (mm Hg/S) −9261 ± 790.8 −9511 ± 540.1 −5232 ± 577.3a −6719 ± 541.2c

LVAWd, left ventricular anterior wall end‐diastolic thickness; EF, ejection fraction; LVIDd, left ventricular internal end‐diastolic dimensions; HR, heart rate; LVESP, LV end‐systolic pressure; LVEDP, LV end‐diastolic pressure; max dp/dt, maximal contraction velocity; min dp/dt, maximal relaxation velocity.

a

P < .05.

b

P < .01 vs. WT sham mice.

c

P < .05 vs. WT MI mice.