Vasovagal Syncope: To Pace or Not to Pace

Permanent pacing versus cardioneuroablation for cardioinhibitory vasovagal syncope

BACKGROUND

We compared the efficacy and safety of cardioneuroablation (CNA) vs. permanent pacing (PM) for recurrent cardioinhibitory vasovagal syncope (CI-VVS).

METHODS

One hundred sixty-two patients (CNA = 61, PM = 101), age 36 + 11 years) with syncope frequency of 6.7 ± 3.9/year were included in this multicenter study. All patients with CNA were provided by a single center, while patients with PM were provided by 4 other centers. In the CNA arm, an electroanatomic mapping guided approach was used to detect and ablate ganglionated plexus sites. Dual chamber rate drop response (RDR) or close loop stimulation (CLS) transvenous and leadless pacemakers were implanted using standard technique. The primary endpoint was freedom from syncope.

RESULTS

Of 101 patients in the PM group, 39 received dual-chamber pacemaker implants with the CLS algorithm, 38 received dual-chamber pacemakers with the RDR algorithm, and 24 received a leadless pacemaker. At 1-year follow-up, 97% and 89% in the CNA and PM group met the primary endpoint (adjusted HR = 0.27, 95% CI 0.06-1.24, p = 0.09). No significant differences in adverse events were noted between groups. There was no significant association between age (HR:1.01, 95% CI 0.96-1.06, p = 0.655), sex (HR:1.15, 95% CI 0.38-3.51, p = 0.809), and syncope frequency in the past year (HR:1.10, 95% CI 0.97-1.25, p = 0.122) and the primary outcome in univariable analyses.

CONCLUSIONS

After adjustment for patient characteristics, the medium-term syncope recurrence risk of CI-VVS patients who underwent CNA was similar to that of a population of patients undergoing pacemaker implantation with a similar safety profile.

Electrocardiographic Patterns in Patients with Neurally Mediated Syncope

The baseline electrocardiogram (ECG) is less informative in neurally mediated syncope (NMS) than in arrhythmic syncope. However, some of the ECG patterns present in NMS can have diagnostic and prognostic value in such patients. Electrocardiographic documentation of a syncopal spell and thus identification of the ECG changes can be performed during tilt table test (TTT) or during prolonged ECG monitoring. This work reviews the specific ECG patterns in NMS, which are primarily related to the cardioinhibitory reflex. In addition, there are other ECG findings present in patients with NMS that are being analyzed, such as increased heart rate variability as well as specific QRS voltage patterns. In addition to the diagnostic and prognostic value, these ECG patterns in NMS may help improving the selection of patients for pacemaker implant.

Pacing Therapies for Vasovagal Syncope

Vasovagal Syncope (VVS) is mediated by a cardiac autonomic reflex with resultant bradycardia and hypotension, precipitating syncope. While benign and mostly well controlled, recurrent VVS can be debilitating and warrants intervention. Non-pharmacological management of VVS have had variable success. In patients with recurrent cardioinhibitory VVS, permanent pacing can be effective. The utility of pacing to preempt the syncopal depends on the prominent temporal role of bradycardia during the vasovagal reflex. Current guidelines recommend pacing as a therapy to consider in older patients with recurrent VVS. Although younger patients can benefit, one should be cautious given the long-term risk of complications. Available data appears to favor a dual chamber pacemaker with closed loop stimulation algorithm to prevent recurrent cardioinhibitory VVS. Several aspects, including mechanistic understanding of VVS and appropriate patient selection, remain unclear, and require further study.

Closed-looped stimulation cardiac pacing for recurrent vasovagal syncope: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Vasovagal syncope (VVS) is defined by transient loss of consciousness with spontaneous rapid recovery. Recently, a closed-loop stimulation pacing system (CLS) has shown superior effectiveness to conventional pacing in refractory VVS. However, systematic review and meta-analysis has not been performed. We assessed the impact of CLS implantation and reduction in recurrent VVS events by a systematic review and a meta-analysis.

METHODS

We comprehensively searched the databases of MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception to September 2017. Included studies were published prospective or retrospective cohort, randomized controlled trial, and case-control studies that compared VVS events between recurrent, severe, or refractory cardioinhibitory VVS patient implanted with CLS and conventional pacing. Data from each study were combined using the random-effects, generic inverse variance method of DerSimonian and Laird to calculate odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals.

RESULTS

Six studies from November 2004 to October 2017 were included in this meta-analysis involving 224 recurrent, severe, or refractory cardioinhibitory VVS patients implanted with CLS and 163 recurrent, severe, or refractory VVS patients implanted with conventional pacing. CLS significantly reduced recurrent VVS events compared to conventional pacing (pooled odds ratio = 0.23, 95% confidence interval: 0.13-0.39, P = 0.000, I 2 = 36.5%) as well as subgroup of four randomized controlled trial studies (pooled odds ratio = 0.28, 95% confidence interval: 0.17-0.44, P = 0.000, I 2 = 39.2%).

CONCLUSION

Closed-loop stimulation significantly reduced recurrent VVS events up to 80% when compared to conventional pacing. Our study suggests that CLS is an effective tool for preventing syncope recurrences in patients with recurrent, severe, or refractory cardioinhibitory VVS.

Pacing for Vasovagal Syncope

Vasovagal syncope (VVS) is due to a common autonomic reflex involving the cardiovascular system. It is associated with bradycardia (cardioinhibitory response) and/or hypotension (vasodepressor response), likely mediated by parasympathetic activation and sympathetic inhibition. While generally a situational, isolated and/or self-limited event, for some, VVS is recurrent, unpredictable and debilitating. Conservative, non-pharmacological management may help, but no specific medical therapy has been proven widely effective. Permanent pacing may have specific benefit, but its value has been debated. The temporal causative association of bradycardia with syncope in those with VVS may help identify which patient could benefit from pacing but the timing and type of pacing in lieu of blood pressure changes may be critical. The mode, rate, pacing algorithm and time to initiate dual-chamber pacing preferentially with respect to the vasovagal reflex may be important to prevent or ameliorate the faint but completely convincing data are not yet available. Based on available data, DDD pacing with the closed loop stimulation algorithm appears a viable, if not the best, alternative presently to prevent recurrent VVS episodes. While several knowledge gaps remain, permanent pacing appears to have a role in managing select patients with VVS.