Why the study?
There is no study evaluating the effects of sacubitril/valsartan in patients with non-compaction cardiomyopathy (NCCM).
Case Report (n=1)
May warrant consideration in refractory non-compaction cardiomyopathy; extends HFrEF benefits yet leaves open efficacy in larger cohorts.
The use of sacubitril/valsartan significantly reduces death or hospitalization in patients with ejection fraction < 40%. There is no study evaluating this drug effects in non-compaction cardiomyopathy (NCCM) individuals. The aim of this article is to report a case of a patient with NCCM initially refractory to gold standard treatment and afterwards treated with sacubitril/valsartan and its improvements. This is a case report of a 48-year-old woman, presenting with NCCM heart failure, who had received standard guideline-directed medical therapy for 18 months without any improvement in clinical and echocardiographic parameters. After that period, sacubitril/valsartan was initiated. After 18 months of refractory usage of guideline-directed medical therapy, sacubitril/valsartan was started, and significant change in functional class (III to I) and important ventricular remodelling were achieved with an improvement of 29% in the ejection fraction, reduction of 7 mm in ventricular diastolic diameter, and mild to none mitral valve functional regurgitation. In this case report, sacubitril/valsartan use was associated with improvement of echocardiographic and clinical parameters in a patient with NCCM.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bonatto et al. (2020) conducted a case report in Non-compaction cardiomyopathy heart failure (n=1). Sacubitril/valsartan vs. Prior standard guideline-directed medical therapy was evaluated on Clinical and echocardiographic parameters (ejection fraction, functional class, ventricular remodelling). Sacubitril/valsartan improved New York Heart Association functional class from III to I and increased ejection fraction by 29% in a patient with non-compaction cardiomyopathy.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: