Why the study?
Does permanent ventricular pacing prevent syncope in patients with ventricular standstill and normal electrophysiology studies?
Does permanent ventricular pacing prevent syncope in patients with ventricular standstill and normal electrophysiology studies?
Permanent ventricular pacing can effectively control syncope in patients with transient autonomic dysfunction and ventricular standstill, despite normal electrophysiology studies.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
May support permanent VVI pacing for symptom control in ventricular standstill with normal EPS; hypothesis-generating from small case series.
Permanent pacing has usually been indicated for the treatment of organic disease of the sinus node or specific cardiac conducting tissue. We report three patients in whom profound syncope was apparently related to intense, transient autonomic dysfunction. Although ventricular standstill was documented in all three, detailed electrophysiology study, responses to graded Valsalva manoeuvres and carotid sinus massage, and repeated observations after cardiac autonomic blockade by IV atropine (0.03 mg/Kg) and propranolol (0.15 mg/Kg) were essentially normal. Permanent ventricular (VVI) pacing has controlled symptoms in all three, over follow-up period of 20 to 26 months. These observations suggest that transient autonomic imbalance may be a cause of undiagnosed cardiac syncope. This is neither excluded by normal electrophysiology study nor by normal responses to usual provocative autonomic interventions.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Tonkin et al. (1983) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: