Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
Received 18 September 2011; accepted after revision 16 December 2011; online publish-ahead-of-print 13 January 2012
Aims Closed-loop stimulation (CLS) pacing has shown greater efficacy in preventing the recurrence of vasovagal syncope
(VVS) in patients with a cardioinhibitory response to head-up tilt test (HUTT) compared with conventional pacing.
Moreover, there is no conclusive evidence to support the superiority of CLS over the conventional algorithms for
syncope prevention. This study retrospectively evaluated the effectiveness of CLS pacing compared with dual-
chamber pacing with conventional specialized sensing and pacing algorithms for syncope prevention in the prevention
of syncope recurrence in patients with refractory VVS and a cardioinhibitory response to HUTT during a long-term
follow-up.
.....................................................................................................................................................................................
Methods Forty-one patients (44% male, 53 + 16 years) with recurrent, refractory VVS (26% with trauma) and a cardioinhibitory
and results response to HUTT who had undergone pacemaker implantation were included in the analysis. Twenty-five patients
received a dual-chamber CLS pacemaker (CLS group) and 16 patients received a dual-chamber pacemaker with conven-
tional algorithms for syncope prevention (conventional pacing group): 9 patients with Medtronic rate drop response
algorithm and 7 patients with Guidant-Boston Scientific sudden brady response algorithm. During the follow-up
(mean 4.4 + 3.0 years, interquartile range 2.2 –7.4 years) one patient (4%) in the CLS group and six (38%) in the con-
ventional pacing group had syncope recurrences (P ¼ 0.016). The Kaplan –Meier actuarial estimate of first recurrence of
syncope after 8 years was 4% in the CLS group and 40% in the conventional pacing group (P ¼ 0.010).
.....................................................................................................................................................................................
Conclusions The results of this retrospective analysis show that, in order to prevent a recurrence of VVS in patients with a car-
dioinhibitory response to HUTT, dual-chamber CLS pacing was more effective than dual-chamber pacing with con-
ventional algorithms for syncope prevention in preventing bradycardia-related syncope.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Keywords Vasovagal syncope † Cardioinhibitory † Pacemaker † Closed-loop stimulation † Rate drop response † Head-up
tilt test
when VVS is refractory to conventional measures and/or pharma- position had been performed on all patients. Exercise tests were per-
cological treatment, permanent pacing may induce clinical benefit formed in 15% when clinically indicated. Cardiac catheterization with
with a reduction in syncope recurrence. coronary angiogram was performed in 2% to exclude coronary
Small and large controlled studies have shown that dual- disease and ischaemia-driven arrhythmias.
chamber pacing, incorporating algorithms that monitor the heart
for faster detection of a significant rate drop and respond by Tilt test protocol
pacing at a high rate, reduces syncope in patients with severe Head-up tilt test had been performed according to current guide-
forms of neurocardiogenic syncope8,12,14 – 17 and may be preferable lines.22 The tests were performed between 9:00 and 11:00 a.m. in a
to the DDI pacing mode with rate hysteresis.18 temperature-controlled room (238C) by an experienced nurse super-
Closed Loop Stimulationw (CLS) function, performed by INOS2, vised by a physician. Electrocardiogram and systolic and diastolic blood
pressure were continuously monitored and recorded using a Task
PROTOS, CYLOS, and EVIA CLS dual-chamber pacemakers (by
Force Monitor (CNSystems, Graz, Austria). After 10 min of supine
Biotronik GmbH & Co., Germany), is a form of rate-adaptive
rest, the patients were tilted to 708 using an electronically operating
pacing which responds to myocardial contraction dynamics by tilt-table with a footboard. If VVS had not occurred after 20 min,
Patient selection
The study group included 41 consecutive patients who had undergone Table 1 Pacemaker models implanted in the two
dual-chamber pacemaker implantation for recurrent, severe, cardioin- groups and the algorithms for syncope prevention in
hibitory VVS at our institute between January 2001 and October 2010.
each model
The clinical and pacemaker records and the test results for all patients
were reviewed. Pacemaker model Patients, Algorithm for
The inclusion criteria were a history of recurrent unpredictable n (%) syncope
syncope (≥2 in the year prior to pacemaker implantation) with signifi- prevention
cant limitation of social and working life, a positive type 2A or 2B ................................................................................
(according to the VASIS classification) cardioinhibitory response to CLS group 25 (61)
HUTT, refractoriness to conventional drug therapy, and/or tilt training. BIOTRONIK INOS2 6 (15) Biotronik CLS
In addition to a positive HUTT result, the diagnosis of VVS was based BIOTRONIK CYLOS 18 (44) Biotronik CLS
on a complete systematic cardiac and neurological evaluation to BIOTRONIK EVIA 1 (2) Biotronik CLS
exclude all other possible causes of syncope. Conventional pacing group 16 (39)
The exclusion criteria included second- or third-degree atrioven- MEDTRONIC KAPPA 700 7 (17) Medtronic RDR
tricular block, sinus node disease, carotid sinus hypersensitivity, GUIDANT INSIGNA I PLUS 2 (5) Guidant-Boston
tachyarrhythmia, an obstructive cardiac pathology, severe valvular Scientific SDR
heart disease, pulmonary hypertension, severe heart failure or severe GUIDANT INSIGNA I ULTRA 4 (10) Guidant-Boston
neurological or psychiatric disorders found during clinical assessment, Scientific SDR
and conventional investigation. BOSTON SCIENTIFIC ALTRUA 3 (7) Guidant-Boston
Before pacemaker implantation resting electrocardiography, con- Scientific SDR
ventional 24 h Holter electrocardiogram (ECG) monitoring, transthor-
acic echocardiography, and carotid sinus massage in the supine
1040 P. Palmisano et al.
myocardial contractility, which consequently reflects information analyses, stratified by study group, and compared using the log-rank
about the haemodynamic state and requirements.26 Based on that re- test. P values of ,0.05 were considered statistically significant.
lationship, CLS transfers the detected changes in myocardial contrac- The data were analysed using the statistical software package Statis-
tion dynamics into individual pacing rates. In the very first days tica version 6.1 (StatSoft Inc., Tulsa, Oklahoma).
following programme implementation, CLS is adjusted to each individ-
ual patient: a reference curve is created and continuously updated with
beat-to-beat impedance measurements. Starting from the programmed Results
LRL, the system is designed to change rate dynamics within the full
range between the lower and the upper rates. Patient characteristics
In the conventional pacing group the device had been programmed
Forty-one patients who had been implanted at our centre between
in DDDR mode with an LRL of between 40 and 60 b.p.m. and a
January 2001 and October 2010 were included in the analysis.
maximum sensor-driven pacing rate of between 100 and 120 b.p.m.
In this group, nine patients had received a pacemaker implemented Twenty five were in the CLS group and 16 in the conventional
with Medtronic RDR algorithm (Medtronic Inc., Minneapolis, MN, pacing group. The baseline characteristics of patients are summar-
ized in Table 2.
Figure 1 Kaplan– Meier estimates of probability of remaining Figure 2 Kaplan –Meier estimates of probability of remaining
free of syncopal recurrences in 25 patients in closed-loop stimu- free of syncopal recurrences in seven patients who received a
lation group (blue line) and 16 patients in control group (red pacemaker with Medtronic rate drop response algorithm (blue
line). line) and nine who received a pacemaker with Guidant-Boston
Scientific sudden brady response algorithm (red line).
difference was found in syncopal recurrence rate in patients who During follow-up, 3 of 34 patients without syncopal recurrences
had received a pacemaker with Medtronic RDR algorithm com- (7%) reported at least one episode of pre-syncopal symptoms [2 of
pared with those who had received a pacemaker with Guidant- 24 patients (8%) in the CLS group and 1 of 10 patients (10%) in the
Boston Scientific SBR algorithm (Figure 2). control group (P ¼ 0.876)] without any impairment to daily life.
1042 P. Palmisano et al.
Discussion algorithms were not compared with CLS pacing in any other pre-
vious experiences.
The results of this retrospective analysis show that, in order to This study compared the efficacy of CLS pacing with dual-
prevent a recurrence of VVS in patients with a cardioinhibitory re- chamber pacing with conventional algorithms in preventing
sponse to HUTT, dual-chamber CLS pacing was more effective bradycardia-related syncope in a selected population of patients
than dual-chamber pacing with conventional algorithms in prevent- with severe, recurrent VVS. Closed-loop stimulation pacing main-
ing bradycardia-related syncope. The benefit was maintained for up tained over a long-term follow-up was shown to be significantly
to 8 years. In the group of patients treated with dual-chamber CLS superior.
pacing, only one case of syncopal recurrences was reported. Our results do not provide a definite explanation, we may only
However, according to the patient clinical history, these were suggest that the interactions between electrical cardiac pacing and
probably related to a psychiatric disorder. the neuroendocrine mechanisms of the vasovagal reflex may
Vasovagal syncope is an abnormal cardiovascular reflex charac- explain the better results of the CLS pacing reported from our
terized by an inappropriate reduction in heart rate and systemic experience.
not assess the impact of the two pacing systems on the perceived recurrent vasovagal syncope: a multicenter, randomized, controlled trial. Circula-
tion 2001;104:52 –7.
quality of life.
15. Abe H, Iwami Y, Nagatomo T, Miura Y, Nakashima Y. Treatment of malignant
neurocardiogenic vasovagal syncope with a rate drop algorithm in dual
chamber cardiac pacing. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1998;21:1473 –5.
Conclusions 16. Sheldon R, Koshman ML, Wilson W, Kieser T, Rose S. Effect of dual-chamber
pacing with automatic rate-drop sensing on recurrent neurally mediated
The data of this retrospective experience suggest that dual- syncope. Am J Cardiol 1998;81:158 –62.
chamber CLS pacing is more effective than DDD pacing with con- 17. Johansen JB, Bexton RS, Simonsen EH, Markowitz T, Erickson MK. Clinical experi-
ence of a new rate drop response algorithm in the treatment of vasovagal and
ventional specialized sensing and pacing algorithms for syncope
carotid sinus syncope. Europace 2000;2:245 –50.
prevention in preventing syncope recurrence in patients with re- 18. Ammirati F, Colivicchi F, Toscano S, Pandozi C, Laudadio MT, De Seta F et al.
fractory VVS and a cardioinhibitory response to HUTT, and that DDD pacing with rate drop response function versus DDI with rate hysteresis
pacing for cardioinhibitory vasovagal syncope. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1998;21:
this benefit may be long term.
2178 –81.
Further prospective, large population studies are needed to 19. Schaldach M, Hutten H. Intracardiac impedance to determine sympathetic activity
confirm these results. If this evidence is confirmed, CLS pacing in rate responsive pacing. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 1992;15:1778 –86.