Sutton R, Brignole M, Menozzi C, Raviele A, Alboni P, Giani P, Moya A
Departments of Cardiology of Royal Brompton Hospital, London, UK.
Circulation. 2000 Jul 18;102(3):294-9. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.102.3.294.
BACKGROUND-This study was performed to compare implantation of a DDI pacemaker with rate hysteresis with no implant in respect to syncopal recurrences in patients with severe cardioinhibitory tilt-positive neurally mediated syncope. METHODS AND RESULTS-Forty-two patients from 18 European centers were randomized to receive a DDI pacemaker programmed to 80 bpm with hysteresis of 45 bpm (19 patients) or no pacemaker (23 patients). Inclusion criteria were >/=3 syncopes over the last 2 years and a positive cardioinhibitory (Vasovagal Syncope International Study types 2A and 2B) response to tilt testing. The median number of previous syncopal episodes was 6; asystolic response to tilt testing was present in 36 patients (86%) (mean asystole, 13.9+/-10.2 seconds). All patients were followed up for a minimum of 1.0 years and a maximum of 6.7 years (mean, 3.7+/-2.2). One patient (5%) in the pacemaker arm experienced recurrence of syncope compared with 14 patients (61%) in the no-pacemaker arm (P=0.0006). In the no-pacemaker arm, the median time to first syncopal recurrence was 5 months, with a rate of 0.44 per year. On repeated tilt testing performed within 15 days after enrollment, positive responses were observed in 59% of patients with pacemakers and in 61% of patients without pacemakers (P=NS). CONCLUSIONS-In a limited, select group of patients with tilt-positive cardioinhibitory syncope, DDI pacing with hysteresis reduced the likelihood of syncope. The benefit of the therapy was maintained over the long term. Even in untreated patients, the syncopal recurrence burden was low. A negative result of tilt testing was not a useful means to evaluate therapy efficacy.
背景——本研究旨在比较植入具有频率滞后功能的双腔按需型(DDI)起搏器与未植入起搏器对严重心脏抑制型倾斜试验阳性神经介导性晕厥患者晕厥复发情况的影响。
方法与结果——来自18个欧洲中心的42例患者被随机分为两组,19例患者接受编程为心率80次/分钟、滞后频率45次/分钟的DDI起搏器,23例患者不植入起搏器。纳入标准为过去2年中晕厥发作≥3次,且倾斜试验呈阳性心脏抑制反应(血管迷走性晕厥国际研究2A和2B型)。既往晕厥发作的中位数为6次;36例患者(86%)倾斜试验时有心脏停搏反应(平均心脏停搏时间为13.9±10.2秒)。所有患者随访至少1.0年,最长6.7年(平均3.7±2.2年)。起搏器组有1例患者(5%)晕厥复发,而未植入起搏器组有14例患者(61%)晕厥复发(P =0.0006)。在未植入起搏器组中,首次晕厥复发的中位时间为5个月,年复发率为0.44次/年。在入组后15天内进行重复倾斜试验时,59%植入起搏器的患者和61%未植入起搏器的患者出现阳性反应(P=无显著性差异)。
结论——在一组有限的、经过挑选的倾斜试验阳性心脏抑制型晕厥患者中,具有滞后功能的DDI起搏降低了晕厥发生可能性。该治疗效果在长期内得以维持。即使是未治疗的患者,晕厥复发负担也较低。倾斜试验阴性并非评估治疗效果的有效手段。