Skip to main content

Table 2 Comparison between control subjects and patients with Marfan syndrome with and without valvular disease and/or cardiovascular surgery

From: Myocardial disease and ventricular arrhythmia in Marfan syndrome: a prospective study

Ā 

Control subjects

Patients with Marfan syndrome

p value

p value

Nā€‰=ā€‰40

No surgery

Surgery

Control versus MFS-1

MFS-1 versus MFS-2

No valvular disease

Valvular disease

Nā€‰=ā€‰55 (MFS-1)

Nā€‰=ā€‰31 (MFS-2)

Female (%)

22 (55)

31 (56.4)

17 (54.8)

0.895

0.891

Age (%)

37.9ā€‰Ā±ā€‰14.4

35.1ā€‰Ā±ā€‰14.7

38.5ā€‰Ā±ā€‰13.7

0.370

0.295

Height (cm)

173ā€‰Ā±ā€‰10

183.2ā€‰Ā±ā€‰11

183.9ā€‰Ā±ā€‰9.5

ā€‰<ā€‰0.001

0.771

Weight (kg)

68.3ā€‰Ā±ā€‰9.2

74.2ā€‰Ā±ā€‰17.9

74.1ā€‰Ā±ā€‰18.3

0.041

0.987

BSA (m2)

1.8ā€‰Ā±ā€‰0.1

1.9ā€‰Ā±ā€‰0.2

1.9ā€‰Ā±ā€‰0.2

0.001

0.923

SBP (mmHg)

121.1ā€‰Ā±ā€‰12.7

121ā€‰Ā±ā€‰12.6

127.3ā€‰Ā±ā€‰15.9

0.899

0.049

DBP (mmHg)

73.7ā€‰Ā±ā€‰9.6

71.6ā€‰Ā±ā€‰70

67ā€‰Ā±ā€‰10.1

0.361

0.067

BB Use (%)a

0 (0)

32 (58.2)

25 (80.6)

n.a

0.034

Ao sinus (mm)

30.5ā€‰Ā±ā€‰2.9

39.8ā€‰Ā±ā€‰5.1

41.1ā€‰Ā±ā€‰6.6b

ā€‰<ā€‰0.001

0.498

z-score sinus

ā€‰āˆ’ā€‰0.8ā€‰Ā±ā€‰0.7

2.5ā€‰Ā±ā€‰1.4

3.3ā€‰Ā±ā€‰1.1b

ā€‰<ā€‰0.001

0.094

LVEDDi (mm/m2)

24.7ā€‰Ā±ā€‰2.4

24.8ā€‰Ā±ā€‰3.4

26.7ā€‰Ā±ā€‰3.5

0.795

0.020

LVEDDiā€‰ā‰„ā€‰30Ā mm/m2 (%)

0 (0)

5 (9.1)

4 (12.9)

0.050

0.717

iLVM

86.9ā€‰Ā±ā€‰20.2

81ā€‰Ā±ā€‰34.7

86.2ā€‰Ā±ā€‰23.04

0.331

0.486

LVEF (%)

68.3ā€‰Ā±ā€‰7.2

66ā€‰Ā±ā€‰7.2

62.5ā€‰Ā±ā€‰7.6

0.131

0.034

LVEFā€‰<ā€‰55%

0 (0)

2 (3.6)

5 (16.1)

0.507

0.093

mw-FS (%)

21ā€‰Ā±ā€‰7

21ā€‰Ā±ā€‰5

16ā€‰Ā±ā€‰6

0.778

0.004

RWT

0.45 (0.40ā€“0.50)

0.37 (0.32ā€“0.45)

0.33 (0.29ā€“0.40)

ā€‰<ā€‰0.001

0.060

E/A

1.5 (1.2ā€“2)

1.6 (1.3ā€“2)

1.6 (1.2ā€“2.1)

0.351

0.975

E/Eā€™

6.4 (5.1ā€“7.6)

7.8 (6.6ā€“9.3)

8.6 (7ā€“12.8)

ā€‰<ā€‰0.001

0.051

LAVi (ml/m2)

21.2ā€‰Ā±ā€‰5.5

21.4ā€‰Ā±ā€‰1.3

26.4ā€‰Ā±ā€‰11.3

0.945

0.038

MVP (%)c

1 (2.5)

8 (14.5)

8 (26.7)

0.045

0.185

TAPSE (mm)

24.5ā€‰Ā±ā€‰2.8

22.1ā€‰Ā±ā€‰4.3

19.5ā€‰Ā±ā€‰3.8

0.003

0.010

TAPSEā€‰ā‰¤ā€‰16Ā mm (%)

0 (0)

3 (6.4)

6 (20.7)

0.250

0.077

NT-ProBNP (pg/ml)

30 (19ā€“44.5)

53.5 (30ā€“74.2)

129 (82ā€“235.2)

0.001

ā€‰<ā€‰0.001

Min HR (bpm)

50.5 (44ā€“55.5)

45 (41.5ā€“49)

48 (44ā€“55)

0.004

0.026

Average HR (bpm)

74.2ā€‰Ā±ā€‰8.3

64 (56.5ā€“71.5)

67 (58.5ā€“73)

ā€‰<ā€‰0.001

0.205

QRS width (ms)

80 (80ā€“90)

96 (86ā€“104)

98 (86ā€“106)

ā€‰<ā€‰0.001

0.639

QTc (ms)

380.2ā€‰Ā±ā€‰24.5

414 (388ā€“433.5)

426 (407ā€“445)

ā€‰<ā€‰0.001

0.028

QTcā€‰>ā€‰460Ā ms (%)

0 (0)

0 (0)

4 (12.9)

n.a

n.a

SVES/24Ā h

2 (0.25ā€“4.7)

7 (2ā€“37.5)

17 (1ā€“56)

ā€‰<ā€‰0.001

0.560

Atrial runs (%)

2 (5)

14 (26.4)

12 (41.4)

0.015

0.318

VES/24Ā h

0 (0ā€“5.7)

6 (1ā€“69.5)

14 (1.5ā€“373.5)

ā€‰<ā€‰0.001

0.312

VE (%)

5 (12.5)

14 (26.4)

13 (41.9)

0.099

0.090

Vent couplets (%)

2 (5)

9 (17)

8 (25.8)

0.077

0.270

NSVT (%)

0 (0)

5 (9.1)

5 (17.2)

0.050

0.273

SDNN (ms)

147 (116ā€“185.2)

185 (156.2ā€“219.2)

132 (95.4ā€“191)

0.001

0.003

RMSDD (ms)

53 (36.2ā€“84)

82.5 (66.2ā€“82.5)

59.3 (42.7ā€“112)

ā€‰<ā€‰0.001

0.040

  1. Values are given as meanā€‰Ā±ā€‰SD, median (IQR) or number (%)
  2. Ao aortic, BB beta-blocker, BSA body surface area, DBP diastolic blood pressure, Dec time deceleration time, HR heart rate, LAVi left atrium volume index, LVEDDi left ventricular end diastolic diameter index, LVEF left ventricular ejection fraction, MFS Marfan syndrome, MVP mitral valve prolapse, mw-FS mid-wall fractional shortening, NSVT non-sustained ventricular, RMSDD mean squared difference of successive NN intervals, RWT relative wall thickness, SBP systolic blood pressure, SDNN standard deviation of the NN interval, SVES supraventricular extrasystoles, VES ventricular extrasystoles, TAPSE tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion, VE ventricular ectopy
  3. aBeta-blocker alone or in combination
  4. bOnly those patients with valvular pathology without aortic root replacement are considered for the mean value of the sinus and the z-score
  5. cOnly those patients with true mitral valve prolapse considered here. Those with mitral valve bulging were not included in this calculation