Table 2.
WT |
YAP-CHKO |
|||
---|---|---|---|---|
Sham | TAC | Sham | TAC | |
n | 10 | 14 | 10 | 14 |
+dP/dt (mm Hg/s) | 7750 ± 1327 | 5839 ± 1403a | 5625 ± 1579b | 4964 ± 1397c |
−dP/dt (mm Hg/s) | 7520 ± 1079 | 6339 ± 1950 | 5125 ± 1165b | 4732 ± 1908d |
LVEDP (mm Hg) | 5.58 ± 1.56 | 12.29 ± 3.29a | 7.8 ± 4.5 | 16.57 ± 5.80d,e |
PG (mm Hg) | NA | 72.86 ± 24.1 | NA | 53.14 ± 22.1 |
a p < 0.05 versus WT-Sham mice.
b p < 0.01 versus WT-Sham mice.
c p < 0.001 versus WT-TAC mice.
d p < 0.001 versus WT-TAC mice.
e p < 0.05 versus YAP-CHKO-Sham. Statistical analyses were conducted with ANOVA. Post hoc analysis was conducted with Tukey's test.