Table 1 Relationships between LVEF, RVEF, and RV end-diastolic volume to geometric markers
From: The effect of right ventricular compression on cardiac function in pediatric pectus excavatum
| Â | Range or n | LVEF (%); p-value | RVEF (%); p-value | Indexed RV end-diastolic volume (mL/m2); p-valuea |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Age | 2.67-24.9 yrs | NS | NS | NS |
BSA | 0.62-2.20 m2 | NS | NS | NS |
Haller | 2.1-39 | NS | NS | NS |
ln(Haller) | 0.74-3.67 | NS | NS | NS |
Male vs. female | 163 vs. 34 | NS | NS | 95.5 vs. 85.4; p = 0.0039 |
RV compression, no vs. yes | 75 vs. 122 | 65.9 vs. 63.1; p = 0.0002 | 58.3 vs. 54.3; p < 0.0001 | 89.3 vs. 96.5; p = 0.0079 |
RV compression: free wall vs. AV groove | 104 vs. 18 | 63.2 vs. 62.2; p = NS | 54.7 vs. 51.6; p = 0.0413 | 95.1 vs. 104.5; p = NS |