Association between coronary microvascular dysfunction and exercise capacity in dilated cardiomyopathy

Figures

• 

  Fig. 1. Study flow diagram. Summary of study enrollment and exclusions. BMI body mass index, CMR cardiovascular magnetic resonance, CPET cardiopulmonary exercise testing, DCM dilated cardiomyopathy

• 

  Fig. 2. Comparison of quantitative perfusion between the DCM and control groups. Patients with DCM had similar rest (left) but lower stress (middle) MBF and lower myocardial perfusion reserve (right) compared to the control group. P values were adjusted for ethnicity and systolic blood pressure. Boxplots were generated using the Tukey method. DCM dilated cardiomyopathy, MBF myocardial blood flow

• 

  Fig. 3. Rest and stress myocardial blood flow and myocardial perfusion reserve in patients with DCM. There was no difference in rest MBF, stress MBF, or MPR in the DCM patients when stratified as LBBB (n = 21) or non-LBBB (n = 45), presence (n = 39) or absence of LGE (n = 27), with an LV EF ≤35% (n = 21) or >35% (n = 45), and genotype positive (n = 14) or negative (n = 39). EF ejection fraction, LBBB left bundle branch block, LGE late gadolinium enhancement, LV left ventricular, MBF myocardial blood flows, MPR myocardial perfusion reserve