Skip to main content
. 2020 Jun 20;110(8):1173–1180. doi: 10.1007/s00392-020-01690-1

Table 2.

MPO and NT-pro-BNP levels and PC parameters over time and significance of means between response groups

Rpts NRpts p R vs NR
0d
MPO (ng/ml) 504 (316-769) 134 (79-300) <0.001
WD (m) 146 ± 200 293 ± 264 0.021
EF (%) 28.4 ± 6.1 26.1 ± 4.7 0.437
NYHA III + IV (n[%]) 30 [88%] 12 [63%] 0.043
NTpBNP (ng/ml) 2380 (854-6570) 2008 (1151-3854) 0.707
30d
MPO (ng/ml) 216 (84-483) 215 (101-528) 0.626
WD (m) 308 ± 203 290 ± 260 0.776
NYHA III + IV (n[%]) 7 [20%] 13 [68%] 0.001
90d
MPO (ng/ml) 188 (109-395) 120 (66-364) 0.328
WD (m) 350 ± 175 369 ± 248 0.816
EF (%) 34.1 ± 10.8 27.8 ± 8.6 0.028
NYHA III + IV (n[%]) 5 [15%] 13 [68%] <0.001
NTpBNP (ng/ml) 2257 (574-4531) 1885 (1036-3696) 0.933

Data are shown as Mean ± SD or median (interquartile range) for not normally distributed values

Rpts responders, NRpts non-responders, WD walking distance in 6-minute walk test, LVEF left-ventricular ejection fraction, 0d baseline, 30d 30 days after implantation, 90d 90 days after implantation

p < 0.05 was considered statistically significant