Difference in cardiac remodeling between female athletes and pregnant women: a case control study

Table 3 Sphericity and conicity indexes

Parameter	Pregnant women	Athletes	Controls	p (athletes vs pregnant women)	p (pregnant women vs controls)	p (athletes vs controls)
LDd	78.25 ± 7.94	76.05 ± 7.34	77.90 ± 6.59	0.08	0.1	0.56
LDs	67.16 ± 9.98	64.87 ± 7.67	65.87 ± 8.63	0.02	0.04	0.42
RDd	46.01 ± 6.09	36.90 ± 5.45	37.45 ± 3.69	< 0.001	< 0.001	0.41
RDs	37.35 ± 3.8	29.40 ± 5.29	31.26 ± 4.32	0.01	0.03	0.36
SId	0.56 ± 0.07	0.49 ± 0.07	0.49 ± 0.63	0.01	0.01	0.9
SIs	0.54 ± 0.05	0.48 ± 0.06	0.49 ± 0.17	< 0.001	0.005	0.74
ApDd	19.63 ± 5.72	15.89 ± 3.09	16.96 ± 7.32	0.21	0.32	0.65
ApDs	13.98 ± 4.12	12.21 ± 2.27	12.91 ± 2.64	0.72	0.84	0.79
ACId	0.38 ± 0.08	0.41 ± 0.09	0.40 ± 0.31	0.23	0.43	0.42
ACIs	0.33 ± 0.07	0.38 ± 0.11	0.37 ± 0.28	0.04	0.05	0.47

Data are expressed as mean ± SD. LDd longitudinal diastolic diameter, LDs longitudinal systolic diameter (ricontrollare abbreviazione), RDd radial diastolic diameter, RDs radial systolic diameter (ricontrollare abbreviazione), Sid diastolic sphericity index, Sis systolic sphericity index, ApDd apical diastolic diameter, ApDS apical systolic diameter, ACId diastolic apical conicity index, ACIs systolic apical conicity index

ISSN: 1476-7120