Central alpha2 adrenoceptors and the pathogenesis of carotid sinus hypersensitivity

Should We Ever Pace for Carotid Sinus Syndrome?

Carotid sinus syndrome has been associated with transient loss of consciousness for millennia, and while steeped in cardiovascular lore, there is little in the way of solid evidence to guide its main treatment modality, permanent cardiac pacing. This article reviews the history of the condition in the context of its contemporary understanding before examining three key concepts in the consideration of what constitutes a manageable disease: first, is there a pathophysiologic rationale for the disease (in this case carotid sinus syndrome)? Second, is there a good diagnostic test that will identify it reliably? And finally, is there a convincingly evidence-based treatment for the disease? Relevant literature is reviewed, and recommendations made in how we view pacing in the context of this intriguingly opaque condition.

Carotid sinus hypersensitivity: block of the sternocleidomastoid muscle does not affect responses to carotid sinus massage in healthy young adults

The arterial baroreflex is crucial for short‐term blood pressure control – abnormal baroreflex function predisposes to syncope and falling. Hypersensitive responses to carotid baroreflex stimulation using carotid sinus massage (CSM) are common in older adults and may be associated with syncope. The pathophysiology of this hypersensitivity is unknown, but chronic denervation of the sternocleidomastoid muscles is common in elderly patients with carotid sinus hypersensitivity (CSH), and is proposed to interfere with normal integration of afferent firing from the carotid baroreceptors with proprioceptive feedback from the sternocleidomastoids, producing large responses to CSM. We hypothesized that simulation of sternocleidomastoid “denervation” using pharmacological blockade would increase cardiovascular responses to CSM. Thirteen participants received supine and tilted CSM prior to intramuscular injections (6–8 mL distributed over four sites) of 2% lidocaine hydrochloride, and 0.9% saline (placebo) in contralateral sternocleidomastoid muscles. Muscle activation was recorded with electromyography (EMG) during maximal unilateral sternocleidomastoid contraction both pre‐ and postinjection. Supine and tilted CSM were repeated following injections and responses compared to preinjection. Following lidocaine injection, the muscle activation fell to 23 ± 0.04% of the preinjection value (P < 0.001), confirming neural block of the sternocleidomastoid muscles. Cardiac (RRI, RR interval), forearm vascular resistance (FVR), and systolic arterial pressure (SAP) responses to CSM did not increase after lidocaine injection in either supine or tilted positions (supine: ΔRRI −72 ± 31 ms, ΔSAP +2 ± 1 mmHg, ΔFVR +4 ± 4%; tilted: ΔRRI −20 ± 13 ms, ΔSAP +2 ± 2 mmHg, ΔFVR +2 ± 4%; all P > 0.05). Neural block of the sternocleidomastoid muscles does not increase cardiovascular responses to CSM. The pathophysiology of CSH remains unknown.

Carotid sinus syndrome

Carotid sinus hypersensitivity, first described less than 65 years ago, is an important and often undiagnosed cause of syncope in the elderly. Its pathophysiology is complex and certain aspects are not completely understood. The timely diagnosis and treatment of this condition can improve morbidity and prevent complications in the elderly. In this article, the prevalence, risk factors, pathophysiology, diagnosis, aspects of carotid sinus massage, and treatment options for the different kinds of carotid sinus hypersensitivity are discussed.

Cardioinhibitory Carotid Sinus Syndrome - a mathematical model

Carotid sinus massage (CSM) is a simple clinical test for stimulating the carotid sinus reflex. During CSM, firm longitudinal massage is applied at the point of maximal pulsation over the carotid bifurcation resulting in relative bradycardia. CSM is used to diagnose Cardioinhibitory Carotid Sinus Syndrome (CICSS). CICSS is an age-related disorder, characterized by profound symptomatic cardioinhibition (> 3 seconds pause) following CSM. CICSS prevalence increases with age and is responsible for 1 to 20% of all pacemaker implantations per year. Treatment options for CSS are limited and much debate still remains around its underlying etiology. In this paper we present a first computer simulation of carotid sinus massage (CSM) in older adults and demonstrate its ability to simulate normal heart rate responses to CSM. Importantly we demonstrate that our mathematical model requires inclusion of model elements to simulate autonomic control of perinodal T-cell activity in order to replicate the profound cardioinhibitory response observed in CICSS. Our model findings implicate CSS as a candidate biomarker of biological aging and frailty.

Symptomatic presentation of carotid sinus hypersensitivity is associated with impaired cerebral autoregulation

Background

Carotid sinus hypersensitivity (CSH) is associated with syncope, unexplained falls, and drop attacks in older people but occurs asymptomatically in 35% of community‐dwelling elders. We hypothesized that impaired cerebral autoregulation is associated with the conversion of asymptomatic CSH to symptomatic CSH. We therefore conducted a case–control study evaluating individuals with CSH with and without the symptoms of syncope or unexplained falls, as well as non‐CSH controls, to determine whether the blood pressure and heart rate changes associated with CSH are associated with symptoms only when cerebral autoregulation is altered.

Methods and Results

Bilateral middle cerebral artery blood flow velocities (BFV) were measured in consecutive patients with symptomatic CSH (n=22) and asymptomatic controls with (n=18) and without CSH (n=14) using transcranial Doppler ultrasonography during lower body negative pressure‐induced systemic hypotension. Within‐group comparisons revealed significantly lower cerebrovascular resistance index (CVR_i) at nadir for the asymptomatic CSH group (right, mean [95% CI]: 2.2 [1.8, 2.8] versus 2.6 [2.2, 3.0]; P=0.005; left: 2.8 [2.4, 3.3] versus 3.1 [2.7, 3.8]; P=0.016). Between‐group comparisons showed higher mean BFV (right: estimated mean difference, B=5.49 [1.98, 8.80], P=0.003; left: 4.82 [1.52, 8.11], P=0.005) and lower CVR_i (right: B=0.08 [0.03, 0.12], P=0.003, left: B=0.07 [0.02, 0.12], P=0.006) in asymptomatic CSH versus symptomatic CSH groups. There were no significant differences in bilateral mean BFV or right CVR_i between the non‐CSH and symptomatic CSH groups but differences were present for left CVR_i (B=0.07 [0.02, 0.013], P=0.015).

Conclusion

Cerebral autoregulation is altered in symptomatic CSH and therefore appears to be associated with the development of hypotension‐related symptoms in individuals with CSH.

Results of carotid sinus massage in a tertiary referral unit--is carotid sinus syndrome still relevant?

BACKGROUND

carotid sinus hypersensitivity (CSH) is associated with syncope, drop attacks and unexplained falls in older people. However, a recent study has also reported a prevalence of 35% in asymptomatic community-dwelling older people.

OBJECTIVE

we conducted a retrospective observational study to investigate the haemodynamic and symptom responses of a large cohort of patients undergoing carotid sinus massage (CSM).

METHODS

the electronically stored haemodynamic data of 302 consecutive patients, aged 71 +/- 11 years, investigated with CSM for unexplained falls and syncope was analysed. Bilateral sequential CSM was performed in the supine and upright positions with continuous electrocardiogram (ECG) and non-invasive beat-to-beat blood pressure monitoring (Taskforce, CN Systems, Austria). CSH (CSH) was defined by maximal R-R interval > or =3 s (cardioinhibitory) and/or a systolic blood pressure drop of > or =50 mmHg (vasodepressor).

RESULTS

a total of 74/302 (25%) subjects had CSH, 37 (50%) of which were cardioinhibitory (CI) and 37 (50%) were vasodepressor (VD) subtypes. Subjects with positive CSM were significantly older (75.2 vs 70.2 years, P < 0.001), and more likely to be male (32% vs 19%, P < 0.01). CSH was diagnosed with right-sided CSM alone in 45 (61%) subjects and erect CSM only in 36 (49%) subjects. Symptom reproduction was more likely with the CI than the VD subtypes (82% vs 28%; P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

CSH was diagnosed in 25% of patients investigated with CSM at our specialist unit, lower than the prevalence of 39% reported for community-dwelling older individuals. This discrepancy may be explained by selection bias and demographic differences, but raises the possibility of CSH being an age-related epiphenomenon rather than a causal mechanism for syncope, drop attacks and unexplained falls. Our observations have important implications for clinical practice and the development of future research strategies.