Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

The benefit of closed loop stimulation in patients with cardioinhibitory vasovagal syncope confirmed by head-up tilt table testing: a systematic review and meta-analysis

  • Published:
Journal of Interventional Cardiac Electrophysiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

A proportion of patients with vasovagal syncope (VVS) experience recurrence despite appropriate management. Closed loop stimulation (CLS) pacing is a promising treatment for a subgroup of patients with cardioinhibitory response on head-up tilt table test (HUTT). Nonetheless, its efficacy remains uncertain. We sought to assess the efficacy of CLS pacing in patients with cardioinhibitory VVS.

Methods

We searched PubMed, Google Scholar, and the Cochrane Central Register of controlled trials for relevant studies (last search date April 23, 2018). Data were pooled using the Mantel-Haenszel fixed-effects model. For cohort studies, we used a Freeman-Tukey transformation to calculate the weighted summary proportion. Primary outcomes are syncope and presyncope.

Results

Eight studies were included in the final analyses (two single-blinded and one double-blinded RCT, two prospective observational studies, and three retrospective observational studies). Two hundred ninety-one patients included, with an average age of 57 years. Quality of evidence is moderate. Use of CLS pacing was associated with reduced risk of syncope (OR 0.08; 95% CI 0.03–0.18; I2 32%) and presyncope (OR 0.34; 95% CI 0.18–0.63; I2 0.00%). Using proportion meta-analysis, the summary estimate of the proportion of cases that developed syncope during CLS pacing was similar between RCTs and prospective studies (3.2% and 3.1%), respectively. This is much lower than the rate of recurrence in the control arm of RCTs at 33.7%. Sensitivity analyses yielded similar results.

Conclusion

CLS pacing is beneficial for patients with recurrent vasovagal syncope who demonstrate a cardioinhibitory response on HUTT.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Diagram 1
Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Soteriades ES, Evans JC, Larson MG, Chen MH, Chen L, Benjamin EJ, et al. Incidence and prognosis of Syncope. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:878–85.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Mosqueda-Garcia R, Furlan R, Tank J, Fernandez-Violante R. The elusive pathophysiology of neurally mediated syncope. Circulation. 2000;102:2898–906.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Connolly SJ, Sheldon R, Thorpe KE, Roberts RS, Ellenbogen KA, Wilkoff BL, et al. Pacemaker therapy for prevention of syncope in patients with recurrent severe vasovagal syncope: second vasovagal pacemaker study (VPS II): a randomized trial. JAMA. 2003;289:2224–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Brignole M, Menozzi C, Moya A, Andresen D, Blanc JJ, Krahn AD, et al. Pacemaker therapy in patients with neurally mediated syncope and documented asystole. Circulation. 2012;125:2566–71.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Shen W-K, Sheldon RS, Benditt DG, Cohen MI, Forman DE, Goldberger ZD, et al. 2017 ACC/AHA/HRS guideline for the evaluation and Management of Patients with Syncope: executive summary: a report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association task force on clinical practice guidelines, and the Heart Rhythm Society. Circulation. 2017;136:e60–e122.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Brignole M, Moya A, de Lange FJ, Deharo J-C, Elliott PM, Fanciulli A, et al. 2018 ESC guidelines for the diagnosis and management of syncope. Eur Heart J. 2018;39:1883–948.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Ruzieh M, Ammari Z, Dasa O, Karim S, Grubb B. Role of closed loop stimulation pacing (CLS) in vasovagal syncope. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol. 2017;40:1302–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Baron-Esquivias G, Morillo CA, Moya-Mitjans A, Martinez-Alday J, Ruiz-Granell R, Lacunza-Ruiz J, et al. Dual-chamber pacing with closed loop stimulation in recurrent reflex vasovagal syncope:the SPAIN study. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2017;70:1720–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Freeman MF, Tukey JW. Transformations related to the angular and the square root. Ann Math Stat. 1950;21:607–11.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Occhetta E, Bortnik M, Audoglio R, Vassanelli C. Closed loop stimulation in prevention of vasovagal syncope. Inotropy controlled pacing in vasovagal syncope (INVASY): a multicentre randomized, single blind, controlled study. Europace. 2004;6:538–47.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Russo V, Rago A, Papa AA, Golino P, Calabrò R, Russo MG, et al. The effect of dual-chamber closed-loop stimulation on syncope recurrence in healthy patients with tilt-induced vasovagal cardioinhibitory syncope: a prospective, randomised, single-blind, crossover study. Heart. 2013;99:1609–13.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Griesbach L, Huber T, Knote B, HÄRTEL J. Closed loop stimulation: therapy for malignant neurocardiogenic syncope. Prog Biomed Res. 2002;7:242–7.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Occhetta E, Bortnik M, Vassanelli C. The DDDR closed loop stimulation for the prevention of vasovagal syncope: results from the INVASY prospective feasibility registry. Europace. 2003;5:153–62.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Palmisano P, Zaccaria M, Luzzi G, Nacci F, Anaclerio M, Favale S. Closed-loop cardiac pacing vs conventional dual-chamber pacing with specialized sensing and pacing algorithms for syncope prevention in patients with refractory vasovagal syncope: results of a long-term follow-up. Europace. 2012;14:1038–43.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Bortnik M, Occhetta E, Dell'Era G, Secco GG, Degiovanni A, Plebani L, et al. Long-term follow-up of DDDR closed-loop cardiac pacing for the prevention of recurrent vasovagal syncope. J Cardiovasc Med (Hagerstown). 2012;13:242–5.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Anguera Ramos I, Rodrigeus F, Di Marco A, Dallaglio P, Sebate X, Cequier A. Effectiveness of closed loop stimulation pacing in preventing disabling cardioinhibitory vasovagal syncope. A single-center experience. Eur Heart J. 2015;36(223):SUPPL. 1.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Rattanawong P, Riangwiwat T, Chongsathidkiet P, Vutthikraivit W, Limpruttidham N, Prasitlumkum N, et al. Closed-looped stimulation cardiac pacing for recurrent vasovagal syncope: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Arrhythm. 2018;34:556–64.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  18. Raviele A, for the Vasovagal S, Pacing Trial I, Giada F, et al. A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of permanent cardiac pacing for the treatment of recurrent tilt-induced vasovagal syncope. The vasovagal syncope and pacing trial (SYNPACE). Eur Heart J. 2004;25:1741–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Yu S, Kanjwal K, He W, Ren K, Cooper E, Karabin B, et al. A long-term follow-up on the use of closed-loop cardiac pacing in patients with refractory neurocardiogenic syncope. The Journal of Innovations in Cardiac Rhythm management. 2015;6:1982–5.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Brignole M, Donateo P, Tomaino M, Massa R, Iori M, Beiras X, et al. Benefit of pacemaker therapy in patients with presumed neurally mediated syncope and documented asystole is greater when tilt test is negative. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol. 2014;7:10–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Sud S, Massel D, Klein GJ, Leong-Sit P, Yee R, Skanes AC, et al. The expectation effect and cardiac pacing for refractory vasovagal syncope. Am J Med. 2007;120:54–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Penn State Heart and Vascular Institute, 500 University Drive, PO Box 850, MC H047, Hershey, PA, 17033, USA

    Mohammed Ruzieh, Mehrdad Ghahramani, Gerald V. Naccarelli & Andrew J. Foy

  2. Penn State Department of Internal Medicine, Hershey, USA

    Matthew Nudy

  3. Baptist Health Louisville, Louisville, KY, USA

    John Mandrola

  4. The University of Toledo Medical Center, Toledo, OH, USA

    Blair P. Grubb

Authors
  1. Mohammed Ruzieh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mehrdad Ghahramani
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Matthew Nudy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Gerald V. Naccarelli
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. John Mandrola
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Blair P. Grubb
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Andrew J. Foy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mohammed Ruzieh.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ruzieh, M., Ghahramani, M., Nudy, M. et al. The benefit of closed loop stimulation in patients with cardioinhibitory vasovagal syncope confirmed by head-up tilt table testing: a systematic review and meta-analysis. J Interv Card Electrophysiol 55, 105–113 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10840-019-00531-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10840-019-00531-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation