https://www.selleckchem.com/products/gw788388.html
3 ± 0.3 cm vs 2.1 ± 0.2; P less then .001). The BAV group presented with a larger AVA planimetry (3.8 ± 0.9 vs 3.3 ± 0.6; P less then .001). However, measuring AVA using continuity equation has shown no differences between groups. If using the principles of coefficient of contraction, it seems that measuring AVA by planimetry overestimates the real anatomic AVA. CONCLUSION This data provide normal values for echocardiographically determined AVA in BAV subjects. This population was characterized by large LVOT diameter and large AVA. The
Like
Comment
Share
