Table 2.
Comparison of Demographics and LVEF by Progression Status
| RVOT PSAX Progression | RVOT PLAX Progression | RV‐FAC Progression | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Yes (n=23) | No (n=15) | P Value | Yes (n=25) | No (n=12) | P Value | Yes (n=21) | No (n=19) | P Value | |
| Age, y, mean±SD | 34.5±12.5 | 33.6±10.7 | 0.825 | 36.2±12.9 | 31.0±7.7 | 0.212 | 34.7±11.7 | 35.8±13.8 | 0.791 |
| Male (%) | 14 (61) | 4 (27) | 0.039 | 11 (44) | 6 (50) | 0.732 | 8 (38) | 11 (58) | 0.210 |
| LVEF, %, mean±SD | 57.6±8.2 | 60.8±5.0 | 0.187 | 58.2±6.9 | 60.0±8.3 | 0.504 | 57.0±7.3 | 60.1±7.2 | 0.184 |
| Baseline RV‐FAC, %, mean±SD | 28.5±9.6 | 38.1±6.6 | 0.002 | 32.1±9.3 | 33.4±10.6 | 0.708 | 35.2±9.7 | 27.7±8.6 | 0.014 |
| Baseline RV basal diameter, cm, mean±SD | 4.6±0.88 | 3.9±0.42 | 0.005 | 4.3±0.79 | 4.2±0.90 | 0.703 | 4.4±0.66 | 4.4±1.0 | 0.969 |
| Major structural TFC satisfied by echocardiography at baseline, n (%) | 17 (74) | 4 (27) | 0.004 | 16 (64) | 4 (33) | 0.080 | 12 (57) | 11 (58) | 0.962 |
Baseline age, sex, LVEF, RV‐FAC, RV basal diameter, and fulfillment of major structural TFC by echocardiography were compared across progression status. P values were calculated using t tests (age, LVEF, RV‐FAC, RV basal diameter) and χ2 analysis (sex, major structural TFC by echocardiography). LVEF indicates left ventricular ejection fraction; PLAX, parasternal long axis; PSAX, parasternal short axis; RV, right ventricular; RV‐FAC, right ventricular fractional area change; RVOT, right ventricular outflow tract; and TFC, Task Force Criteria.