Click on image to view larger version.
Figure 5 LV Mass and Atrial Volumes Better Distinguish HFpEF From HLVH Subjects Than Indexes of Diastolic Dysfunction
Histograms for group distributions of E/E' ratio and diastolic dysfunction (DD) grade (A) versus LVMI and LAVmax (B). The latter show better separation between HFpEF and HLVH subjects. (C) LA enlargement was weakly correlated to LVMI, particularly in the HFpEF subjects. (D) Product of LVMI and LAVmax provides the best separation among study groups. (E) Receiver-operating curves for discriminating between HFpEF and HLVH. The most optimal characteristic was found for LVMI x LAVmax (AUC = 0.85), followed by LVMI (AUC = 0.79) and LAVmax (AUC = 0.77). E/E' ratio (AUC = 0.69) and DD grade (AUC = 0.68) were poorer discriminators. The optimal cut-off value (4,418 ml x g/m2.7) of LVMI x LAVmax (arrow) separated the groups with a sensitivity 0.838 and specificity 0.825. AUC = area under the curve; E = early diastolic tissue velocity; E' = longitudinal early tissue velocity; LAV = left atrial volume; LVMI = left ventricular mass index; other abbreviations as in Figures 1 and 2.