Cardiac and aortic size measures in adult echocardiography should be indexed by body surface area regardless of body mass index =============================================================================================================================== * Angus Fung * Dhnanjay Soundappan * Daniel E Loewenstein * David Playford * Geoffrey Strange * Rebecca Kozor * James Otton * Martin Ugander ## Abstract **BACKGROUND** Body size indexation is a foundation of the diagnostic interpretation of cardiac size measures used in imaging assessment of cardiovascular health. Body surface area (BSA) is the most commonly used metric for body size indexation of echocardiographic measures, but its use in patients who are underweight or obese is questioned (body mass index (BMI) <18·5 kg/m2 or ≥30 kg/m2, respectively). We hypothesized that mortality can be used to identify an optimal body size indexation metric for echocardiographic measures that would be a better predictor of survival than BSA regardless of BMI. **METHODS** In this big data, cohort study, adult patients with no prior valve replacement were selected from the National Echo Database Australia. Survival analysis was performed for echocardiographic measures both unindexed and indexed to different body size metrics, with 5-year cardiovascular mortality as the primary endpoint. **FINDINGS** Indexation of echocardiographic measures (left ventricular diameter [n=337,481] and mass [n=330,959], left atrial area [n=136,989], aortic sinus diameter [n=125,130], right atrial area [n=81,699], right ventricular diameter [n=3,575], right ventricular outflow tract diameter [n=2,841]) by BSA had better prognostic performance vs unindexed measures (healthy/overweight: C-statistic 0·656 vs 0·618, average change in Akaike Information Criteria (ΔAIC) 800; underweight: C-statistic 0·669 vs 0·654, ΔAIC 15; obese: C-statistic 0·630 vs 0·612, ΔAIC 113). Indexation by other body size metrics (lean body mass or height and/or weight raised to various powers) did not improve prognostic performance versus BSA by a clinically relevant magnitude (average C-statistic increase ≤0·01), with smaller differences in higher BMI subgroups. Similar results were obtained using sex-disaggregated analysis, for indexation of other aortic or cardiac dimension or volume measures, and for all-cause mortality. **INTERPRETATION** Indexing measures of cardiac and aortic size by BSA improves prognostic performance regardless of BMI, and no other body size metric has a clinically meaningful better performance. **FUNDING** This research was supported in part by grants (PI Ugander) from New South Wales Health, Heart Research Australia, and the University of Sydney. ## Introduction Quantification of the dimensions of the heart and great vessels using echocardiography has both diagnostic and prognostic value for the prediction of morbidity and mortality, which also may help guide treatment in patients.1–8 Currently, the recommended method for body size indexation of cardiac volumes is body surface area (BSA).9 However, there is heterogeneity in the literature as to the best indexation method, and whether or not indexing of cardiac measures improves their predictive value for cardiovascular events.6, 10–12 In underweight and overweight patients, correction for BSA can overestimate or underestimate the prevalence of left ventricular hypertrophy, and inaccurately normalise or exaggerate indices of cardiac size.10 Furthermore, there are concerns regarding the physiological relationships between left ventricular mass and indexation methods. While the relationships between body surface area, height, and weight are non-linear, the indexation of left ventricular mass by these variables often assumes linear relationships.13 An argument can also be drawn from the theory of similarity, which reasons that relative geometries are best indexed to body size variables of similar dimensionality. For example, since left ventricular mass is related to cardiac dimensions raised to the third power, and BSA is related to a body dimension raised to the second power, it is logical that left ventricular mass should be proportional to BSA3/2 (also expressed as BSA1·5).14 Studies on indexation for prognostic performance have been limited in patient sample size and range of cardiac measures indexed.5, 15–18 Using the large-scale data available in the National Echocardiography Database of Australia (NEDA), the aim of the study was to derive one or more formulae based on height and weight to provide a method of body size indexation of cardiac and aortic measures that will be a better predictor of all-cause mortality than current methods based on body surface area. ## Methods ### Study design NEDA is a large observational registry that includes routinely recorded echocardiographic data across 30 centres in Australia. Individual data linkage is used to incorporate health outcomes such as all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. The study cohort consists of patients over the age of 18 who have typically been referred clinically for imaging evaluation of known or suspected cardiovascular disease. The study was approved by the lead ethics committee at the Royal Prince Alfred Hospital (2019/ETH06989). NEDA is registered with the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12617001387314). Ethical approval has been obtained from the Human Research Ethics Committees at the respective recruiting sites, and the study adheres to the Declaration of Helsinki. ### Study cohort Echocardiographic data and basic patient characteristics were collected from participating centres from 1 January 2000 to 21 May 2019, and were transferred into a central database via an automated data extraction process. All data was cleaned through removal of duplicate, inconsistent, and/or impossible measurements, and transformed into a standardized format. Individuals contributing to NEDA were assigned a unique identifier linked to their echocardiograms and their anonymity protected by stringent security protocols. As shown in Figure 1, 631,824 patients were present in the database. Of these, 77,125 (12%) were excluded for prior valve replacement. Echocardiograms with time from echocardiography to census or death, cause of mortality (cardiovascular and all-cause), height, weight, and the cardiac measure of interest were selected. Different populations were individually filtered for each measure of interest and analysed to maximise the number of patients for analysis. For patients with multiple echocardiograms, the earliest recorded echocardiogram was selected. Patients were grouped according to body mass index (BMI) <18·5 kg/m2, BMI 18·5-30 kg/m2, or BMI ≥30 kg/m2. ![Figure 1.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F1.medium.gif) [Figure 1.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F1) Figure 1. Flowchart describing patient inclusion. Exact numbers for the respective cardiac measure specific populations are given in Table 1. View this table: [Table 1.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/T1) Table 1. Subject characteristics for patients with available follow-up data for the respective cardiac or aortic measures. RA = right atrial, RV = right ventricular, RVOT = right ventricular outflow tract, LA = left atrial, LV = left ventricular, IVS = interventricular septum. ### Endpoints The primary endpoints of interest were all-cause and cardiovascular mortality. Mortality data was obtained by linkage with the National Death Index.19 A detailed probability matching process involving patient identifiers obtained at echocardiographic recording was used to link survival status of individuals up to the study census date of 21 May 2019. Listed causes of death were described using ICD-10 coding, which allowed for cardiovascular death to be defined (range 100-199 ICD-10AM chapter codes).20 ### Statistical analysis NEDA data analyses and reports were generated in agreement with STROBE guidelines.21 All data used in analyses were provided and no missing data was imputed. Standard procedures for describing grouped data, such as median [interquartile range (IQR)], and proportions according to patient characteristics were applied. Cox-proportional hazard models with proportional hazards confirmed by visual inspection and numerical analysis of Schoenfeld residuals were used to derive C-statistics and hazard- ratios (with 95% confidence intervals) for the risk of all-cause and cardiovascular mortality for the entirety of the study follow-up and a five year follow-up duration. The change in Akaike information criterion (ΔAIC) was used to interpret the statistical robustness of the body size indexation metrics. Due to the magnification of ΔAIC by large sample sizes, the C- statistic was chosen to dictate the magnitude of difference between metrics and clinical relevance in a sample size independent fashion. Kaplan-Meier curves were constructed to visually inspect differences between indexation measures. An iterative function was coded to derive 50,000 combinations of body size metrics using different height and weight exponents according to the formula where a given body size metric = height^x • weight^y. Random combinations of x and y were used as the metric for indexation for the respective echocardiographic measures for subsequent Cox-regression analysis. Cox-regression was performed using the echocardiographic measure indexed by the derived body size metric with five-year cardiovascular mortality as the endpoint to obtain the C-statistic. The C-statistic was color coded in a scatterplot to present differences in the prognostic strength of different body size metrics including BSA as calculated according to Mosteller22or Du Bois23, lean body mass formulas by Hume24, Boer25, or James26, BSA raised to various powers, and height and/or weight raised to various powers. All statistical analyses was performed using R 4.0.4 (R Core Team, R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria).27 Significance was accepted at the level of p<0.05 (two-sided). ## Results ### Study Cohort Subject characteristics and size of the study cohorts for various cardiac and aortic measures are presented in Table 1. Due to the large sample size, differences in baseline characteristics between BMI groups were statistically significant but were not of a clinically meaningful magnitude. ### Body size metrics and mortality Across the echocardiographic measures of left atrial area (n=136,989), right atrial area (n=81,699), left ventricular end-diastolic diameter (n=337,481) and mass (n=330,959), right ventricular end-diastolic diameter (n=3,575), and aortic sinus diameter (n=125,130), indexation by BSA as calculated by Mosteller had an average C- statistic increase from 0·656 to 0·618 for the healthy/overweight cohort (average change in Akaike Information Criteria (ΔAIC) 800), an increase from 0·669 to 0·654 for the underweight cohort (ΔAIC 15), and an increase from 0·630 vs 0·612 for the obese cohort (ΔAIC 113) compared to unindexed measures as shown in Table 2.22 Indexation by other body size metrics yielded a C-statistic increase ≤0·01. Further sex-disaggregated analysis did not differ upon visual inspection, and numerical differences between BSA and the best body size indexation metric were not clinically meaningful (average C-statistic increase ≤0·02, detailed data not shown). Smaller differences in C-statistic between indexation metrics were observed in higher BMI subgroups. Similar results were obtained using long-term cardiovascular mortality not limited to five years, and both long-term and five year all-cause mortality (Appendix 1-3). Similar trends were observed across indexation of other aortic dimensions (sinotubular junction, ascending, root, arch) and cardiac chamber volumes (left atrial end-systolic diameter and volume, left ventricular end-diastolic volume) (Appendix 4-33). Kaplan Meier curves did not show visually appreciable differences between indexation by BSA compared to indexation by weight across any measure (Appendix 34-48). View this table: [Table 2.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/T2) Table 2. C-statistic for 5-year cardiovascular mortality both unindexed and indexed by different body size metrics for representative anatomical measures, and their average. BMI = body mass index, BSA = body surface area, LBM = lean body mass, RA = right atrial, RV = right ventricular, RVOT = right ventricular outflow tract, LA = left atrial, LV = left ventricular, IVS = interventricular septum. Figure 2 shows how indexation by different body size metrics (based on the formula height^x weight^y) perform prognostically, averaged across representative cardiac and aortic anatomical measure. The color scale shows increasing C-statistics, where each change in color represents one percentage point of C-statistic. Numerical values for selected measures are presented in Table 2. In summary, in the healthy/overweight cohort, indexation by BSA improves prognostic performance compared to unindexed measures by five percentage points of the C-statistic. Further improvement beyond BSA is limited to <1 percentage point improvement on average. Indexation by BSA yielded smaller improvements in prognostic performance in the underweight and obese cohort, but indexation by any other body size metric did not provide any meaningfully stronger association with survival. Further analyses in obese populations and higher BMI subgroups (BMI 30-35, 35-40 and >40) showed that BSA performed similarly to height raised to various powers (data not shown). ![Figure 2.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F2.medium.gif) [Figure 2.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F2) Figure 2. Average prognostic strength for predicting 5-year cardiovascular mortality when indexing for body size for RA area, RV diameter, LA area, LV diameter, LV mass, and aortic sinus diameter. The horizontal axis represents the height exponent and the vertical axis represents the weight exponent of a body size indexation metric of the format height^x * weight^y. The color scale shows the prognostic strength which ranges from a C-statistic of 0.6 to 0.7, each increment representing a 1%-point improvement. The figure is composed of 50,000 points each representing an individual Cox regression. Existing body size metrics were plotted: h = height, w = weight, hw = height * weight, BMI = body mass index, BSA = body surface area, M = Mosteller, D = DuBois. In the healthy/overweight group, from unindexed to body surface area by Mosteller there is a 5%-point improvement, but further improvement is limited to <1%-point. Similar trends can be observed in the underweight and obese group. ### Relative prognostic strength of different cardiac and aortic size measures Figure 3 shows the prognostic strength of indexing by BSA across all 14 cardiac and aortic measures analysed. In the healthy/overweight group, left atrial size and left ventricular mass had the highest prognostic strength, with a C-statistic ten percentage points higher than left ventricular size and most aortic dimensions. Right atrial and right ventricular sizes had an intermediate prognostic strength. Aortic sinus diameter had the strongest prognostic strength of all aortic measures, and aorta at sinotubular diameter had the weakest prognostic strength. ![Figure 3.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F3.medium.gif) [Figure 3.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F3) Figure 3. The prognostic strength of indexing by body surface area across cardiac measures for the prediction of 5-year cardiovascular mortality. In the healthy/overweight group, left atrial size and left ventricular mass had the highest prognostic strength, with a C-statistic 10%-points higher than left ventricular size and most aortic dimensions. Right atrial and right ventricular sizes had an intermediate prognostic strength. Aortic sinus diameter had the strongest prognostic strength of all aortic measures, and aorta at sinotubular diameter had the weakest prognostic strength. ## Discussion In this study of body size indexation of cardiac and aortic sizes using real-world echocardiographic data from a large-scale nationwide cohort, indexation by BSA is shown to improve prognostic performance compared to unindexed measures regardless of BMI. Furthermore, no other body size indexation metric provided any meaningful improvement in prognostic performance beyond BSA. The current study comprehensively assessed indexation metrics with varying height and weight exponents in different forms (multiplicative, additive/subtractive, both), and in sex-specific cohorts. It was not possible to derive a body size metric with clinically meaningfully better prognostic performance than BSA. This means that using mortality as the arbiter of indexation effectiveness, no other indexation method exists that is clinically meaningfully better than BSA across all investigated cardiac measures. In accordance with current guidelines for echocardiography9, cardiac measures should continue to be indexed using any formula for BSA, regardless of BMI or the echocardiographic measure of interest. ### Comparison with indexation by height The current study found that indexation by height raised to various powers does not improve prognostic performance compared to BSA regardless of BMI. It has been suggested that indexation by height improves detection of left ventricular hypertrophy and associations with cardiovascular events and mortality compared to BSA in obese populations.12, 18, 28 Recently, it has been shown that indexation by height for left atrial volumes was able to maintain proportionality and avoid overcorrection for body size.29 However, other studies have found no improvement in indexation by height compared to BSA.5 The findings of the current study confirm that indexation by height does not provide additional prognostic value compared to indexation by BSA across any BMI group. ### Sex differences The current study found that indexation of cardiac measures disaggregated by sex does not improve prognostic peformance. Differences in left ventricular mass have been found between male and female patients.30, 31 A consideration of sex in the indexation of cardiac measures measured by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging has been suggested for improved prediction of incident heart failure.11 The current study analysed sex-specific cohorts and found that body size metrics derived from sex-specific cohorts were interchangeable with negligible differences in prognostic performance. Thus, the findings of the current study suggest that the relationship between cardiac or aortic size and survival in relation to body size does not fundamentally differ between the sexes. Notably, this is still consistent with using sex-specific cut-offs for normality for a given measure. ### Relative prognostic association for different aortic or cardiac size measures The current study found that the prognostic strength of indexed echocardiographic measures varied markedly. Studies comparing prognostic strength of indexed measures are limited with most studies only investigating the prognostic strength of one or two measures.5, 6, 32 The current study found that left ventricular mass index and left atrial volume index had the highest prognostic strengths of any measure, with C-statistics broadly similar to those found in previous smaller studies.5 Right atrial and right ventricular sizes, and the dimensions of the pulmonic valve expressed as RVOT diameter had moderate prognostic strength that has yet to be evaluated in literature. The current study was the first to compare the prognostic strength of different indexed aortic sizes. Furthermore, when indexed to body size, aortic sinus diameter is the only aortic size measure with good prognostic performance, and other aortic sizes have a considerably weaker association with prognosis. Notably, left ventricular end-diastolic diameter or volume, both measures of left ventricular dilatation, had among the weakest associations with prognosis. ### Strengths and limitations The limitations of applying and interpreting big data in NEDA have been acknowledged previously.20, 33 At the time of analysis, NEDA did not include important clinical details of common conditions such as coronary artery disease, ischaemic heart disease, and clinically diagnosed HF, which may impact mortality. That said, the current study used large-scale, real-world data with relevant clinical outcomes that inevitably have measurement variability between centres and observers. While on one hand this is a limitation as an uncontrolled source of data heterogeneity, it is in fact a strength that reinforces the integrity of observed trends that exist despite sources of variability. The main endpoint of consideration, cardiovascular mortality, was linked from the Australian National Death Index which has a high sensitivity and specificity (93% and 90%, respectively) validating its use as the primary endpoint.19 Furthermore, in the current study, similar trends were also observed across all-cause mortality, further reinforcing the validity of the results. The current study did not include the impact of age on aortic size or mortality. An increase in age has long been established to be related to an increased aortic size, which would affect interpretation of the indexed measure.34, 35 The association between age and mortality is both intuitive and widely accepted.36, 37 However, a consideration of age in choice of body size indexation metric is impractical clinically, and fails to achieve the goal of indexation, namely, to account for body size. A consideration of age is more appropriate for cut-off values of the indexed cardiac and aortic size measure, but not necessarily for the choice of body size indexation metric. Importantly, similar age distributions existed between the respective cohorts in the current study. Thus, while theoretically attractive, consideration of the effect of age is beyond the scope of this study. The NEDA cohort comprises patients being investigated for known or suspected cardiovascular disease. Data was largely obtained from specialist centres or clinics in Australia. While the NEDA cohort is representative of the diverse and multiethnic population in Australia with a largely high-functioning level of health care, applicability may be different in other contexts. In conclusion, the current study has definitively demonstrated that measures of cardiac and aortic size should continue to be indexed by BSA regardless of BMI. No other existing or derived body size metric (lean body mass or height and/or weight raised to various powers) is clinically meaningfully better. ## Data Availability All data produced in the present work are contained in the manuscript (unless otherwise specified). Supplementary data in the present study is available upon reasonable request to the authors. ## Appendix ![Appendix 1.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F4.medium.gif) [Appendix 1.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F4) Appendix 1. C-statistic for long-term cardiovascular mortality both unindexed and indexed by different body size metrics for representative anatomical measures, and their average. BMI = body mass index, BSA = body surface area, LBM = lean body mass, RA = right atrial, RV = right ventricular, RVOT = right ventricular outflow tract, LA = left atrial, LV = left ventricular, IVS = interventricular septum. ![Appendix 2.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F5.medium.gif) [Appendix 2.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F5) Appendix 2. C-statistic for 5-year all-cause mortality both unindexed and indexed by different body size metrics for representative anatomical measures, and their average. BMI = body mass index, BSA = body surface area, LBM = lean body mass, RA = right atrial, RV = right ventricular, RVOT = right ventricular outflow tract, LA = left atrial, LV = left ventricular, IVS = interventricular septum. ![Appendix 3.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F6.medium.gif) [Appendix 3.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F6) Appendix 3. C-statistic for long-term all-cause mortality both unindexed and indexed by different body size metrics for representative anatomical measures, and their average. BMI = body mass index, BSA = body surface area, LBM = lean body mass, RA = right atrial, RV = right ventricular, RVOT = right ventricular outflow tract, LA = left atrial, LV = left ventricular, IVS = interventricular septum. ![Appendix 4.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F7.medium.gif) [Appendix 4.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F7) Appendix 4. Average prognostic strength of indexing for body size in aorta at sinotubular diameter. ![Appendix 5.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F8.medium.gif) [Appendix 5.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F8) Appendix 5. Average prognostic strength of indexing for body size in aortic sinus diameter. ![Appendix 6.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F9.medium.gif) [Appendix 6.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F9) Appendix 6. Average prognostic strength of indexing for body size in aortic arch diameter. ![Appendix 7.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F10.medium.gif) [Appendix 7.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F10) Appendix 7. Average prognostic strength of indexing for body size in aortic root diameter. ![Appendix 8.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F11.medium.gif) [Appendix 8.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F11) Appendix 8. Average prognostic strength of indexing for body size in ascending aorta diameter. ![Appendix 9.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F12.medium.gif) [Appendix 9.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F12) Appendix 9. Average prognostic strength of indexing for body size in LA area. ![Appendix 10.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F13.medium.gif) [Appendix 10.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F13) Appendix 10. Average prognostic strength of indexing for body size in LA diameter. ![Appendix 11.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F14.medium.gif) [Appendix 11.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F14) Appendix 11. Average prognostic strength of indexing for body size in LA volume. ![Appendix 12.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F15.medium.gif) [Appendix 12.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F15) Appendix 12. Average prognostic strength of indexing for body size in LV diameter. ![Appendix 13.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F16.medium.gif) [Appendix 13.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F16) Appendix 13. Average prognostic strength of indexing for body size in LV volume. ![Appendix 14.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F17.medium.gif) [Appendix 14.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F17) Appendix 14. Average prognostic strength of indexing for body size in IVS thickness. ![Appendix 15.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F18.medium.gif) [Appendix 15.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F18) Appendix 15. Average prognostic strength of indexing for body size in LV mass. ![Appendix 16.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F19.medium.gif) [Appendix 16.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F19) Appendix 16. Average prognostic strength of indexing for body size in RA area. ![Appendix 17.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F20.medium.gif) [Appendix 17.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F20) Appendix 17. Average prognostic strength of indexing for body size in RV diameter. Visual artifact present in BMI <18.5 kg/m2 due to small population size (n=96). ![Appendix 18.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F21.medium.gif) [Appendix 18.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F21) Appendix 18. Average prognostic strength of indexing for body size in RVOT diameter. Visual artifact present in BMI <18.5 kg/m2 due to small population size (n=78). ![Appendix 19.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F22.medium.gif) [Appendix 19.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F22) Appendix 19. Statistical analysis for 5-year cardiovascular mortality by different indexation metrics for aorta at sinotubular diameter. ![Appendix 20.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F23.medium.gif) [Appendix 20.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F23) Appendix 20. Statistical analysis for 5-year cardiovascular mortality by different indexation metrics for aortic sinus diameter. ![Appendix 21.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F24.medium.gif) [Appendix 21.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F24) Appendix 21. Statistical analysis for 5-year cardiovascular mortality by different indexation metrics for aortic arch diameter. ![Appendix 22.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F25.medium.gif) [Appendix 22.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F25) Appendix 22. Statistical analysis for 5-year cardiovascular mortality by different indexation metrics for aortic root diameter. ![Appendix 23.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F26.medium.gif) [Appendix 23.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F26) Appendix 23. Statistical analysis for 5-year cardiovascular mortality by different indexation metrics for ascending aorta diameter. ![Appendix 24.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F27.medium.gif) [Appendix 24.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F27) Appendix 24. Statistical analysis for 5-year cardiovascular mortality by different indexation metrics for LA area. ![Appendix 25.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F28.medium.gif) [Appendix 25.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F28) Appendix 25. Statistical analysis for 5-year cardiovascular mortality by different indexation metrics for LA diameter. ![Appendix 26.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F29.medium.gif) [Appendix 26.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F29) Appendix 26. Statistical analysis for 5-year cardiovascular mortality by different indexation metrics for LA volume. ![Appendix 27.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F30.medium.gif) [Appendix 27.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F30) Appendix 27. Statistical analysis for 5-year cardiovascular mortality by different indexation metrics for LV diameter. ![Appendix 28.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F31.medium.gif) [Appendix 28.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F31) Appendix 28. Statistical analysis for 5-year cardiovascular mortality by different indexation metrics for LV volume. ![Appendix 29.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F32.medium.gif) [Appendix 29.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F32) Appendix 29. Statistical analysis for 5-year cardiovascular mortality by different indexation metrics for IVS diameter. ![Appendix 30.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F33.medium.gif) [Appendix 30.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F33) Appendix 30. Statistical analysis for 5-year cardiovascular mortality by different indexation metrics for LV mass. ![Appendix 31.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F34.medium.gif) [Appendix 31.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F34) Appendix 31. Statistical analysis for 5-year cardiovascular mortality by different indexation metrics for RA area. ![Appendix 32.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F35.medium.gif) [Appendix 32.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F35) Appendix 32. Statistical analysis for 5-year cardiovascular mortality by different indexation metrics for RV diameter. ![Appendix 33.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F36.medium.gif) [Appendix 33.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F36) Appendix 33. Statistical analysis for 5-year cardiovascular mortality by different indexation metrics for RVOT diameter. ![Appendix 34.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F37.medium.gif) [Appendix 34.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F37) Appendix 34. Long-term cardiovascular mortality for aorta at sinotubular diameter unindexed, indexed by BSA and indexed by weight ![Appendix 35.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F38.medium.gif) [Appendix 35.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F38) Appendix 35. Long-term cardiovascular mortality for aortic sinus diameter unindexed, indexed by BSA and indexed by weight. ![Appendix 36.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F39.medium.gif) [Appendix 36.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F39) Appendix 36. Long-term cardiovascular mortality for aortic arch diameter unindexed, indexed by BSA and indexed by weight. ![Appendix 37.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F40.medium.gif) [Appendix 37.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F40) Appendix 37. Long-term cardiovascular mortality for aortic root diameter unindexed, indexed by BSA and indexed by weight. ![Appendix 38.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F41.medium.gif) [Appendix 38.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F41) Appendix 38. Long-term cardiovascular mortality for ascending aorta diameter unindexed, indexed by BSA and indexed by weight. ![Appendix 39.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F42.medium.gif) [Appendix 39.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F42) Appendix 39. Long-term cardiovascular mortality for LA area unindexed, indexed by BSA and indexed by weight. ![Appendix 40.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F43.medium.gif) [Appendix 40.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F43) Appendix 40. Long-term cardiovascular mortality for LA diameter unindexed, indexed by BSA and indexed by weight. ![Appendix 41.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F44.medium.gif) [Appendix 41.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F44) Appendix 41. Long-term cardiovascular mortality for LA volume unindexed, indexed by BSA and indexed by weight. ![Appendix 42.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F45.medium.gif) [Appendix 42.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F45) Appendix 42. Long-term cardiovascular mortality for LV diameter unindexed, indexed by BSA and indexed by weight. ![Appendix 43.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F46.medium.gif) [Appendix 43.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F46) Appendix 43. Long-term cardiovascular mortality for LV volume unindexed, indexed by BSA and indexed by weight. ![Appendix 44.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F47.medium.gif) [Appendix 44.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F47) Appendix 44. Long-term cardiovascular mortality for IVS thickness unindexed, indexed by BSA and indexed by weight. ![Appendix 45.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F48.medium.gif) [Appendix 45.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F48) Appendix 45. Long-term cardiovascular mortality for LV mass unindexed, indexed by BSA and indexed by weight. ![Appendix 46.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F49.medium.gif) [Appendix 46.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F49) Appendix 46. Long-term cardiovascular mortality for RA area unindexed, indexed by BSA and indexed by weight. ![Appendix 47.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F50.medium.gif) [Appendix 47.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F50) Appendix 47. Long-term cardiovascular mortality for RV diameter unindexed, indexed by BSA and indexed by weight. ![Appendix 48.](http://medrxiv.org/https://www.medrxiv.org/content/medrxiv/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F51.medium.gif) [Appendix 48.](http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2021/12/11/2021.12.09.21267530/F51) Appendix 48. Long-term cardiovascular mortality for RVOT diameter unindexed, indexed by BSA and indexed by weight. * Received December 9, 2021. * Revision received December 9, 2021. * Accepted December 11, 2021. * © 2021, Posted by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory The copyright holder for this pre-print is the author. All rights reserved. The material may not be redistributed, re-used or adapted without the author's permission. ## References 1. 1.Casale PN, Devereux RB, Milner M, et al. Value of echocardiographic measurement of left ventricular mass in predicting cardiovascular morbid events in hypertensive men. Ann Intern Med. 1986; 105: 2:173–8. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.7326/0003-4819-105-2-173&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=2942070&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F12%2F11%2F2021.12.09.21267530.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1986D501800003&link_type=ISI) 2. 2.Verdecchia P, Schillaci G, Borgioni C, et al. Adverse prognostic significance of concentric remodeling of the left ventricle in hypertensive patients with normal left ventricular mass. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1995; 25: 4:871–8. [FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6MzoiUERGIjtzOjExOiJqb3VybmFsQ29kZSI7czo0OiJhY2NqIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjg6IjI1LzQvODcxIjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjEvMTIvMTEvMjAyMS4xMi4wOS4yMTI2NzUzMC5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 3. 3.Krumholz HM, Larson M, Levy D. Prognosis of left ventricular geometric patterns in the Framingham Heart Study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1995; 25: 4:879–84. [FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6MzoiUERGIjtzOjExOiJqb3VybmFsQ29kZSI7czo0OiJhY2NqIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjg6IjI1LzQvODc5IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjEvMTIvMTEvMjAyMS4xMi4wOS4yMTI2NzUzMC5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 4. 4.Koren MJ, Devereux RB, Casale PN, Savage DD, Laragh JH. Relation of left ventricular mass and geometry to morbidity and mortality in uncomplicated essential hypertension. Ann Intern Med. 1991; 114: 5:345–52. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.7326/0003-4819-114-5-345&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=1825164&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F12%2F11%2F2021.12.09.21267530.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1991EZ17400001&link_type=ISI) 5. 5.Ristow B, Ali S, Na B, Turakhia MP, Whooley MA, Schiller NB. Predicting heart failure hospitalization and mortality by quantitative echocardiography: is body surface area the indexing method of choice? The Heart and Soul Study. J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2010; 23: 4:406–13. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.echo.2010.01.019&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=20202792&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F12%2F11%2F2021.12.09.21267530.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000276248600012&link_type=ISI) 6. 6.Liao Y, Cooper RS, Durazo-Arvizu R, Mensah GA, Ghali JK. Prediction of mortality risk by different methods of indexation for left ventricular mass. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1997; 29: 3:641–7. [FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6MzoiUERGIjtzOjExOiJqb3VybmFsQ29kZSI7czo0OiJhY2NqIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjg6IjI5LzMvNjQxIjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjEvMTIvMTEvMjAyMS4xMi4wOS4yMTI2NzUzMC5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 7. 7.Levy D, Garrison RJ, Savage DD, Kannel WB, Castelli WP. Prognostic implications of echocardiographically determined left ventricular mass in the Framingham Heart Study. N Engl J Med. 1990; 322: 22:1561–6. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1056/NEJM199005313222203&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=2139921&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F12%2F11%2F2021.12.09.21267530.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1990DF14000003&link_type=ISI) 8. 8.Benjamin EJ, D’Agostino RB, Belanger AJ, Wolf PA, Levy D. Left atrial size and the risk of stroke and death: the Framingham Heart Study. Circulation. 1995; 92: 4:835–41. [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MTQ6ImNpcmN1bGF0aW9uYWhhIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjg6IjkyLzQvODM1IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjEvMTIvMTEvMjAyMS4xMi4wOS4yMTI2NzUzMC5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 9. 9.Lang RM, Badano LP, Mor-Avi V, et al. Recommendations for cardiac chamber quantification by echocardiography in adults: an update from the American Society of Echocardiography and the European association of Cardiovascular Imaging. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2015; 16: 3:233–71. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/ehjci/jev014&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=25712077&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F12%2F11%2F2021.12.09.21267530.atom) 10. 10.Lang RM, Bierig M, Devereux RB, et al. Recommendations for chamber quantification. Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2006; 7: 2:79–108. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.euje.2005.12.014&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=16458610&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F12%2F11%2F2021.12.09.21267530.atom) 11. 11.Bluemke DA, Kronmal RA, Lima JA, et al. The relationship of left ventricular mass and geometry to incident cardiovascular events: the MESA (Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis) study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2008; 52: 25:2148–55. [FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6MzoiUERGIjtzOjExOiJqb3VybmFsQ29kZSI7czo0OiJhY2NqIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjEwOiI1Mi8yNS8yMTQ4IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjEvMTIvMTEvMjAyMS4xMi4wOS4yMTI2NzUzMC5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 12. 12.Chirinos JA, Segers P, De Buyzere ML, et al. Left ventricular mass: allometric scaling, normative values, effect of obesity, and prognostic performance. Hypertension. 2010; 56: 1:91–8. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.110.150250&link_type=DOI) 13. 13.De Simone G, Daniels SR, Devereux RB, et al. Left ventricular mass and body size in normotensive children and adults: assessment of allometric relations and impact of overweight. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1992; 20: 5:1251–60. [FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6MzoiUERGIjtzOjExOiJqb3VybmFsQ29kZSI7czo0OiJhY2NqIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjk6IjIwLzUvMTI1MSI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDIxLzEyLzExLzIwMjEuMTIuMDkuMjEyNjc1MzAuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 14. 14.Dewey FE, Rosenthal D, Murphy Jr DJ, Froelicher VF, Ashley EA. Does size matter? Clinical applications of scaling cardiac size and function for body size. Circulation. 2008; 117: 17:2279–87. [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MTQ6ImNpcmN1bGF0aW9uYWhhIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjExOiIxMTcvMTcvMjI3OSI7czo0OiJhdG9tIjtzOjUwOiIvbWVkcnhpdi9lYXJseS8yMDIxLzEyLzExLzIwMjEuMTIuMDkuMjEyNjc1MzAuYXRvbSI7fXM6ODoiZnJhZ21lbnQiO3M6MDoiIjt9) 15. 15.Devereux RB, Lutas EM, Casale PN, et al. Standardization of M-mode echocardiographic left ventricular anatomic measurements. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1984; 4: 6:1222–30. [FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6MzoiUERGIjtzOjExOiJqb3VybmFsQ29kZSI7czo0OiJhY2NqIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjg6IjQvNi8xMjIyIjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjEvMTIvMTEvMjAyMS4xMi4wOS4yMTI2NzUzMC5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 16. 16.Airale L, Paini A, Ianniello E, et al. Left atrial volume indexed for height 2 is a new sensitive marker for subclinical cardiac organ damage in female hypertensive patients. Hypertens Res. 2021:1–8. 17. 17.Cuspidi C, Carugo S, Tadic M. Looking at the best indexing method of left atrial volume in the hypertensive setting. Hypertens Res. 2021:1–3. 18. 18.De Simone G, Kizer JR, Chinali M, et al. Normalization for body size and population- attributable risk of left ventricular hypertrophy: the Strong Heart Study. Am J Hypertens. 2005; 18: 2:191–6. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/j.amjhyper.2004.08.032&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=15752946&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F12%2F11%2F2021.12.09.21267530.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000227394100008&link_type=ISI) 19. 19.Magliano D, Liew D, Pater H, et al. Accuracy of the Australian National Death Index: comparison with adjudicated fatal outcomes among Australian participants in the Long-term Intervention with Pravastatin in Ischaemic Disease (LIPID) study. Aust N Z J Public Health. 2003; 27: 6:649–53. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1111/j.1467-842X.2003.tb00615.x&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=14723416&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F12%2F11%2F2021.12.09.21267530.atom) 20. 20.Playford D, Strange G, Celermajer DS, et al. Diastolic dysfunction and mortality in 436 360 men and women: the National Echo Database Australia (NEDA). Eur Heart J Cardiovasc Imaging. 2021; 22: 5:505–15. 21. 21.Sharp MK, Tokalić R, Gómez G, Wager E, Altman DG, Hren D. A cross-sectional bibliometric study showed suboptimal journal endorsement rates of STROBE and its extensions. J Clin Epidemiol. 2019; 107:42–50. [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=http://www.n&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F12%2F11%2F2021.12.09.21267530.atom) 22. 22.Mosteller R. Simplified calculation of body-surface area. N Engl J Med. 1987; 317: 17:1098-. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1056/NEJM198710223171718&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=3657876&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F12%2F11%2F2021.12.09.21267530.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1987K543200028&link_type=ISI) 23. 23.DuBois D. A formula to estimate the approximate surface area if height and body mass be known. Arch Intern Med. 1916; 17:863–71. [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000202580600002&link_type=ISI) 24. 24.Hume R. Prediction of lean body mass from height and weight. J Clin Pathol. 1966; 19: 4:389–91. [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6OToiamNsaW5wYXRoIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjg6IjE5LzQvMzg5IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjEvMTIvMTEvMjAyMS4xMi4wOS4yMTI2NzUzMC5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 25. 25.Boer P. Estimated lean body mass as an index for normalization of body fluid volumes in humans. Am J Physiol Renal Physiol. 1984; 247: 4:F632–F6. [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=6496691&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F12%2F11%2F2021.12.09.21267530.atom) 26. 26.Research DMGoO, James WPT, Waterlow JC. Research on Obesity: a Report of the DHSS/MRC Group; Compiled by WPT James: HM Stationery Office; 1976. 27. 27.Team RC. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. 2013. 28. 28.De Simone G, Devereux RB, Roman MJ, Alderman MH, Laragh JH. Relation of obesity and gender to left ventricular hypertrophy in normotensive and hypertensive adults. Hypertension. 1994; 23: 5:600–6. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1161/01.HYP.23.5.600&link_type=DOI) 29. 29.Jeyaprakash P, Moussad A, Pathan S, et al. A Systematic Review of Scaling Left Atrial Size: Are Alternative Indexation Methods Required for an Increasingly Obese Population? J Am Soc Echocardiogr. 2021; 34: 10:1067–76.e3. 30. 30.Hammond IW, Devereux RB, Alderman MH, Laragh JH. Relation of blood pressure and body build to left ventricular mass in normotensive and hypertensive employed adults. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1988; 12: 4:996–1004. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/0735-1097(88)90467-6&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=3417996&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F12%2F11%2F2021.12.09.21267530.atom) 31. 31.Liebson PR, Grandits G, Prineas R, et al. Echocardiographic correlates of left ventricular structure among 844 mildly hypertensive men and women in the Treatment of Mild Hypertension Study (TOMHS). Circulation. 1993; 87: 2:476–86. [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6MTQ6ImNpcmN1bGF0aW9uYWhhIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjg6Ijg3LzIvNDc2IjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjEvMTIvMTEvMjAyMS4xMi4wOS4yMTI2NzUzMC5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 32. 32.Ramu B, Elwan AM, Coleman CI, Silverman DI, Gluck JA. The association between baseline left atrial volume index and all-cause mortality in patients with heart failure: a meta- analysis. Conn Med. 2015; 79: 8. 33. 33.Strange G, Stewart S, Celermajer D, et al. Poor long-term survival in patients with moderate aortic stenosis. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2019; 74: 15:1851–63. [FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6MzoiUERGIjtzOjExOiJqb3VybmFsQ29kZSI7czo0OiJhY2NqIjtzOjU6InJlc2lkIjtzOjEwOiI3NC8xNS8xODUxIjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjEvMTIvMTEvMjAyMS4xMi4wOS4yMTI2NzUzMC5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 34. 34.Lederle FA, Johnson GR, Wilson SE, et al. Relationship of age, gender, race, and body size to infrarenal aortic diameter. J Vasc Surg. 1997; 26: 4:595–601. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1016/S0741-5214(97)70057-0&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=9357459&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F12%2F11%2F2021.12.09.21267530.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=A1997YE45200007&link_type=ISI) 35. 35.Wolak A, Gransar H, Thomson LE, et al. Aortic size assessment by noncontrast cardiac computed tomography: normal limits by age, gender, and body surface area. JACC Cardiovasc Imaging. 2008; 1: 2:200–9. [Abstract/FREE Full Text](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/ijlink/YTozOntzOjQ6InBhdGgiO3M6MTQ6Ii9sb29rdXAvaWpsaW5rIjtzOjU6InF1ZXJ5IjthOjQ6e3M6ODoibGlua1R5cGUiO3M6NDoiQUJTVCI7czoxMToiam91cm5hbENvZGUiO3M6NDoiamltZyI7czo1OiJyZXNpZCI7czo3OiIxLzIvMjAwIjtzOjQ6ImF0b20iO3M6NTA6Ii9tZWRyeGl2L2Vhcmx5LzIwMjEvMTIvMTEvMjAyMS4xMi4wOS4yMTI2NzUzMC5hdG9tIjt9czo4OiJmcmFnbWVudCI7czowOiIiO30=) 36. 36.Vaupel JW. How change in age-specific mortality affects life expectancy. Population Studies. 1986; 40: 1:147–57. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1080/0032472031000141896&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=11611920&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F12%2F11%2F2021.12.09.21267530.atom) 37. 37.Romero-Ortuno R, Kenny RA. The frailty index in Europeans: association with age and mortality. Age Ageing. 2012; 41: 5:684–9. [CrossRef](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=10.1093/ageing/afs051&link_type=DOI) [PubMed](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=22522775&link_type=MED&atom=%2Fmedrxiv%2Fearly%2F2021%2F12%2F11%2F2021.12.09.21267530.atom) [Web of Science](http://medrxiv.org/lookup/external-ref?access_num=000308011000025&link_type=ISI)