Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2022 May 2:9:856160.
doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.856160. eCollection 2022.

Prognosis of Adults With Isolated Left Ventricular Non-Compaction: Results of a Prospective Multicentric Study

Hilla Gerard  1 , Nicolas Iline  2 , Hélène Martel  1 , Karine Nguyen  3   4 , Pascale Richard  5   6 , Erwan Donal  7 , Jean-Christophe Eicher  8 , Olivier Huttin  9 , Christine Selton-Suty  9 , Pascale Raud-Raynier  10 , Guillaume Jondeau  11 , Nicolas Mansencal  12 , Caroline Sawka  13 , Flavie Ader  5   6 , Jean-François Pruny  14 , Anne-Claire Casalta  1 , Nicolas Michel  1 , Valeria Donghi  1 , Laurence Faivre  13 , Roch Giorgi  15 , Philippe Charron  5   14 , Gilbert Habib  1   16
Affiliations

Prognosis of Adults With Isolated Left Ventricular Non-Compaction: Results of a Prospective Multicentric Study

Hilla Gerard et al. Front Cardiovasc Med. .

Abstract

Background: Whether left ventricular non-compaction (LVNC) bears a different prognosis than dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) is still a matter of debate.

Methods: From a multicenter French prospective registry, we compared the outcomes of 98 patients with LVNC and 65 with DCM. The primary endpoint combined cardiovascular death, heart transplantation, and hospitalization for cardiovascular events. The two groups presented similar outcomes but different left ventricular ejection fractions (LVEF) (43.3% in LVNC vs. 35.95% in DCM, p = 0.001). For this reason, a subgroup analysis was performed comparing only patients with LVEF ≤ 45%, including 56 with LVNC and 49 with DCM.

Results: Among patients with LVEF≤ 45%, at 5-year follow-up, the primary endpoint occurred in 33 (58.9%) among 56 patients with LVNC and 18 (36.7%) among 49 patients with DCM (p = 0.02). Hospitalization for heart failure (18 [32.14%] vs. 5 [10.20%], p = 0.035) and heart transplantation were more frequent in the LVNC than in the DCM group. The incidences of rhythmic complications (24 [42.85%] vs. 12 [24.48%], p = 0.17), embolic events, and cardiovascular death were similar between LVNC and DCM cases. Among the 42 patients with LVNC and LVEF > 45%, the primary endpoints occurred in only 4 (9.52%) patients, including 2 hospitalizations for heart failure and 3 rhythmic complications, but no embolic events.

Conclusion: In this prospective cohort, patients with LVNC who have left ventricular dysfunction present a poorer prognosis than DCM patients. Heart failure events were especially more frequent, but embolic events were not. Patients with LVNC and preserved ejection fraction present very few events in 5 years.

Keywords: dilated cardiomyopathy registry; heart failure; left ventricular non-compaction; prognosis; registry.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Flow chart.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Survival free from primary outcome at 5-year follow-up in the whole population of 98 LVNC and 65 DCM cases. LVNC, left ventricular non-compaction; DCM, dilated cardiomyopathy.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Survival free from primary outcome at 5-year follow-up in patients with left ventricular ejection fraction <45%. LVNC, left ventricular non-compaction; DCM, dilated cardiomyopathy.
Figure 4
Figure 4
Survival free from primary outcome at 5-year follow-up in patients with LVNC depending on their left ventricular ejection fraction. LVNC, left ventricular non-compaction; LVEF, left ventricular ejection fraction.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Elliott P, Andersson B, Arbustini E, Bilinska Z, Cecchi F, Charron P, et al. . Classification of the cardiomyopathies: a position statement from the european society of cardiology working group on myocardial and pericardial diseases. Eur Heart J. (2007) 29:270–6. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehm342 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Jenni R, Oechslin E, Schneider J, Attenhofer Jost C, Kaufmann PA. Echocardiographic and pathoanatomical characteristics of isolated left ventricular non-compaction: a step towards classification as a distinct cardiomyopathy. Heart Br Card Soc. (2001) 86:666–71. 10.1136/heart.86.6.666 - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Stöllberger C, Stöllberger C, Gerecke B, Finsterer J, Engberding R. Refinement of echocardiographic criteria for left ventricular noncompaction. Int J Cardiol. (2013) 165:463–7. 10.1016/j.ijcard.2011.08.845 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Jacquier A, Thuny F, Jop B, Giorgi R, Cohen F, Gaubert JY, et al. . Measurement of trabeculated left ventricular mass using cardiac magnetic resonance imaging in the diagnosis of left ventricular non-compaction. Eur Heart J. (2010) 31:1098–104. 10.1093/eurheartj/ehp595 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Thuny F, Jacquier A, Jop B, Giorgi R, Gaubert JY, Bartoli JM, et al. . Assessment of left ventricular non-compaction in adults: Side-by-side comparison of cardiac magnetic resonance imaging with echocardiography. Arch Cardiovasc Dis. (2010) 103:150–9. 10.1016/j.acvd.2010.01.002 - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources