Key result
Dual-chamber permanent pacing reduced the 2-year estimated syncope recurrence rate compared to sensing only (25% vs 57%; P=0.039) in patients with severe asystolic neurally mediated syncope.
Why the study?
Does dual-chamber permanent pacing reduce syncope recurrence in patients ≥40 years with severe asystolic neurally mediated syncope?
RCT (n=77)
Double-blind
randomly assigned
Yes
Does dual-chamber permanent pacing reduce syncope recurrence in patients ≥40 years with severe asystolic neurally mediated syncope?
Effect estimate: 57% relative reduction (95% CI 4-81)
Absolute Event Rate: 25% vs 57%
Absolute Risk Reduction: 32%
p-value: p=0.039
Dual-chamber permanent pacing significantly reduces the recurrence of syncope in patients aged 40 and older with severe asystolic neurally mediated syncope.
Supports dual-chamber pacing to reduce syncope recurrence in severe asystolic neurally mediated syncope; confirms randomized benefit in patients ≥40 years.
BACKGROUND: The efficacy of cardiac pacing for prevention of syncopal recurrences in patients with neurally mediated syncope is controversial. We wanted to determine whether pacing therapy reduces syncopal recurrences in patients with severe asystolic neurally mediated syncope. METHODS AND RESULTS: Double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled study conducted in 29 centers in the Third International Study on Syncope of Uncertain Etiology (ISSUE-3) trial. Patients were ≥40 years, had experienced ≥3 syncopal episodes in the previous 2 years. Initially, 511 patients, received an implantable loop recorder; 89 of these had documentation of syncope with ≥3 s asystole or ≥6 s asystole without syncope within 12 ± 10 months and met criteria for pacemaker implantation; 77 of 89 patients were randomly assigned to dual-chamber pacing with rate drop response or to sensing only. The data were analyzed on intention-to-treat principle. There was syncope recurrence during follow-up in 27 patients, 19 of whom had been assigned to pacemaker OFF and 8 to pacemaker ON. The 2-year estimated syncope recurrence rate was 57% (95% CI, 40-74) with pacemaker OFF and 25% (95% CI, 13-45) with pacemaker ON (log rank: P=0.039 at the threshold of statistical significance of 0.04). The risk of recurrence was reduced by 57% (95% CI, 4-81). Five patients had procedural complications: lead dislodgment in 4 requiring correction and subclavian vein thrombosis in 1 patient. CONCLUSIONS: Dual-chamber permanent pacing is effective in reducing recurrence of syncope in patients ≥40 years with severe asystolic neurally mediated syncope. The observed 32% absolute and 57% relative reduction in syncope recurrence support this invasive treatment for the relatively benign neurally mediated syncope. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov. Unique identifier: NCT00359203.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Brignole et al. (2012) conducted an RCT in severe asystolic neurally mediated syncope (n=77). Dual-chamber pacing with rate drop response vs. Sensing only (pacemaker OFF) was evaluated on syncope recurrence (57% relative reduction, 95% CI 4-81, p=0.039). Dual-chamber permanent pacing reduced the 2-year estimated syncope recurrence rate compared to sensing only (25% vs 57%; P=0.039) in patients with severe asystolic neurally mediated syncope.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: