Why the study?
ILR is underutilized in clinical practice, especially in elderly patients with recurrent, traumatic, unexplained syncope, and data regarding the risk of traumatic syncopal recurrence during monitoring are lacking.
Does remote monitoring added to implantable loop recorders reduce time to diagnosis and syncopal recurrences in patients with unexplained, recurrent, traumatic syncope?
Does remote monitoring added to implantable loop recorders reduce time to diagnosis and syncopal recurrences in patients with unexplained, recurrent, traumatic syncope?
In patients with unexplained, recurrent, traumatic syncope, the addition of remote monitoring to implantable loop recorders significantly reduces time to diagnosis and the risk of subsequent syncopal events.
ILR monitoring appears safe in this cohort; leaves open need for RCTs before changing elderly syncope practice.
BACKGROUND: Implantable loop recorder (ILR) is still underutilized in clinical practice, especially in the setting of elderly patients with recurrent, traumatic, unexplained syncope. Data on the actual risk of traumatic syncopal recurrence during ILR monitoring in this specific patient setting are lacking. RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS: Prospective, multicentre registry enrolling consecutive patients undergoing ILR insertion for unexplained, recurrent, traumatic syncope. In a proportion of enrolled patients, remote monitoring (RM) was used for device follow-up. The risk of traumatic and non-traumatic syncopal recurrences during ILR observation were prospectively assessed. RESULTS: A total of 483 consecutive patients (68±14 years, 59% male) were enrolled. During a median follow-up of 18 months, a final diagnosis was reached in 270 patients (55.9%). The risk of syncopal and traumatic syncopal recurrence was of 26.5 and 9.3%, respectively. RM significantly reduced the time to diagnosis (19.7±10.3 vs. 22.1±10.8 months; p=0.015) and was associated with a significant reduction in the risk of syncope recurrence of 48% (p<0.001), and of traumatic syncope recurrence of 49% (p=0.018). CONCLUSIONS: ILR monitoring is effective and safe in patients with unexplained, recurrent, traumatic syncope. RM reduces the time to diagnosis and significantly reduces the risk of traumatic and non-traumatic syncopal relapses.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Palmisano et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: