Evidence Hub

Who ‘nose’, is it the angiotensin receptor neprilysin inhibitor?: a case series of persistent nasal pruritus in heart failure patients receiving sacubitril/valsartan

J. Gan, H. Rheault, Y. Wong

European Heart Journal: Case Reports, 2021

3 citations

Abstract

Abstract Background Sacubitril/valsartan is approved for the treatment of chronic heart failure with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction of ≤40% to decrease mortality and morbidity. Nasal pruritus is not a recognized adverse effect in the product information. In this case series, we encountered three patients who presented with nasal pruritus that improved after discontinuation of sacubitril/valsartan. Case summary Three patients aged 58–73 years-old presented with pruritus at the nasal septum post-initiation of sacubitril/valsartan. The pruritus did not subside despite the use of anti-histamines. Within 3–6 months, all individuals discontinued sacubitril/valsartan with complete resolution of their nasal pruritus. Discussion Many physicians may not aware of this unusual but reversible adverse effect of sacubitril/valsartan. Despite the positive prognostic value of sacubitril/valsartan, the constant nasal pruritus had impacted the quality of life of our patients, leading them to discontinue sacubitril/valsartan permanently.

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a case series, done in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free