The differences between the group feasibilities of CFVR assessment
Variables | Group 1 (n = 903) | Group 2 (n = 1,204) | Group 3 (n = 693) | Group 4 (n = 113) | Group 5 (n = 101) | P value |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Feasibility | 63.5% | 89.6% | 88.7% | 91.2% | 76.2% | < 0.0001 |
Feasibility in obesity vs. not obese patients | 61.9% vs. 65.0% (P = 0.36) | 86.5% vs. 91.3% (P < 0.01) | 86.2% vs. 90.2% (P = 0.11) | 84.4% vs. 93.0% (P = 0.11) | 65.5% vs. 80.6% (P = 0.11) | - |
Group 1 vs. group 2, P < 0.0001; group 2 vs. group 3, P = 0.55; group 3 vs. group 4, P = 0.44; group 4 vs. group 5, P < 0.003; group 1 vs. group 5, P < 0.02. -: blank cell
AZ and OH: Conceptualization, Investigation, Writing—original draft, Writing—review & editing, Supervision. EP and IB: Validation, Writing—review & editing. EK: Investigation, Writing—original draft, Writing—review & editing, Supervision. All authors read and approved the submitted version.
The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.
All the phases of these studies were approved by the local ethical committee of Research Cardiology Center “Medika”.
Informed consent to participate in the study was obtained from all participants.
Not applicable.
The data supporting the results of the article can be obtained by directly contacting the corresponding author (zag_angel@yahoo.com).
Not applicable.
© The Author(s) 2024.