Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 28, 2025

Isolation and Functional Characterization of Human Ventricular Cardiomyocytes from Fresh Surgical Samples
Published on: April 21, 2014
Characteristics and long-term survival of patients with left ventricular non-compaction cardiomyopathy
Emre Demir1, Selen Bayraktaroğlu2, Akın Çinkooğlu2
1Department of Cardiology, Ege University School of Medicine, Bornova, Turkey.
Insights
Left ventricular non-compaction cardiomyopathy (LVNC) shows distinct cardiac imaging findings compared to dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM). A higher non-compacted to compacted ratio on cardiac MRI predicts adverse events, prompting a re-evaluation of diagnostic criteria.
Area of Science:
- Cardiology
- Medical Imaging
- Cardiovascular Diseases
Background:
- Left ventricular non-compaction cardiomyopathy (LVNC) is a complex heart condition with unclear diagnostic criteria.
- Distinguishing LVNC from dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) is crucial for patient management and prognosis.
- Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging is key for assessing myocardial structure and function.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare demographic and prognostic variables between LVNC and DCM patients.
- To evaluate the role of CMR imaging in diagnosing and predicting outcomes in LVNC.
- To assess survival data in patients with LVNC and DCM phenotypes.
Main Methods:
- Retrospective analysis of 262 non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy patients (LVNC and DCM).
- Diagnosis of LVNC based on Petersen's CMR criteria (non-compacted to compacted ratio ≥ 2.3).
- Assessment of major adverse cardiovascular events, including cardiac death, LV assist device implantation, or heart transplantation.
Main Results:
- LVNC patients exhibited significantly higher left ventricular end-diastolic and systolic volumes, cardiac output, stroke volume, and cardiac index.
- Kaplan-Meier survival analysis did not show significant differences between LVNC and DCM groups based on Petersen's criteria.
- A non-compacted to compacted ratio of 2.57 was associated with increased risk of adverse cardiovascular events (HR: 1.90).
Conclusions:
- The study highlights the need to re-evaluate current diagnostic criteria for LVNC.
- Further investigation into CMR variables and their correlation with demographic factors and survival is essential.
- The non-compacted to compacted ratio may serve as a valuable predictor of adverse outcomes in LVNC.
Aims:
Left ventricular non-compaction cardiomyopathy (LVNC) is a poorly understood entity resulting in heart failure. Whether it is a distinct form of cardiomyopathy or an anatomical phenotype is a subject of discussion. The current diagnosis is based on morphologic findings by comparing the compacted to non-compacted myocardium. The study aimed to compare demographic and prognostic variables of patients with dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) and LVNC. Emphasis was given to cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging analysis. Data on survival were also assessed.
Methods And Results:
We retrospectively evaluated the characteristics and outcomes of 262 non-ischaemic cardiomyopathy patients with LVNC and DCM phenotypes. Petersen's CMR criteria of non-compacted to the compacted myocardial ratio 2.3 were used to diagnose LVNC. The primary endpoint was a composite endpoint of major adverse cardiovascular events comprising cardiovascular-related death, left ventricular assisted device implantation, or heart transplantation. A total of 262 patients with CMR data were included in the study. One hundred fifty-five patients who fulfilled CMR criteria were diagnosed as LVNC. CMR findings revealed that LVNC patients had higher left ventricular end-diastolic (137.2 ± 51.6, 116.8 ± 44.6, P = 0.002) and systolic volume index (98.4 ± 49.5, 85.9 ± 42.7, P = 0.049). Cardiac haemodynamics, cardiac output (5.61 ± 2.03, 4.96 ± 1.83; P = 0.010), stroke volume (73.9 ± 28.8, 65.1 ± 25.1; P = 0.013), and cardiac index (2.85 ± 1.0, 2.37 ± 0.72; P < 0.0001), were higher in LVNC patients. Of all the 249 patients, 102 (40.9%) patients demonstrated late gadolinium enhancement (LGE). According to Petersen's criteria, the Kaplan-Meier survival outcome did not reveal significant differences (hazard ratio [HR]: 1.53, 95% confidence interval [CI]: [0.89-2.63], P = 0.11). The presence or pattern of LGE did not show significant importance for endpoint-free survival. Most of the sub-epicardial LGE pattern was found in LVNC patients (94.4%). When receiver operator characteristics analysis was applied to NC/C ratio to discriminate the primary endpoint, a higher NC/C ratio of 2.57 was associated with adverse events (HR: 1.90, 95% CI: [1.12-3.24], P = 0.016).
Conclusions:
Our study questions the criteria being used for the diagnosis of LVNC. Further evaluation of CMR variables and association of these findings with demographic variables and survival is mandatory.
More Related Videos
08:49Author Spotlight: Enhancing Graft Viability Assessment Through Quantitative Metrics and Innovative Reservoir Systems
Published on: August 2, 2024
12:45Benefits of Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy in an Asynchronous Heart Failure Model Induced by Left Bundle Branch Ablation and Rapid Pacing
Published on: December 11, 2017
Related Concept Videos
Cardiomyopathy II: Dilated Cardiomyopathy
Cardiomyopathy III: Hypertrophic Cardiomyopathy
Cardiomyopathy V: Interprofessional Care
Cardiomyopathy I: Introduction and Classification
Cardiomyopathy IV: Restrictive Cardiomyopathy
Cardiomyopathy VI: Nursing Management