Predictors of positive electrophysiological study in patients with syncope and bundle branch block: PR interval and type of conduction disturbance

Tachyarrhythmias in congenital heart disease

The prevalence of congenital heart disease (CHD) in adult patients has risen with advances in diagnostic and surgical techniques. Surgical modifications and hemodynamic changes increase the susceptibility to arrhythmias, impacting morbidity and mortality rates, with arrhythmias being the leading cause of hospitalizations and sudden deaths. Patients with CHD commonly experience both supraventricular and ventricular arrhythmias, with each CHD type associated with different arrhythmia patterns. Macroreentrant atrial tachycardias, particularly cavotricuspid isthmus-dependent flutter, are frequently reported. Ventricular arrhythmias, including monomorphic ventricular tachycardia, are prevalent, especially in patients with surgical scars. Pharmacological therapy involves antiarrhythmic and anticoagulant drugs, though data are limited with potential adverse effects. Catheter ablation is preferred, demanding meticulous procedural planning due to anatomical complexity and vascular access challenges. Combining imaging techniques with electroanatomic navigation enhances outcomes. However, risk stratification for sudden death remains challenging due to anatomical variability. This article practically reviews the most common tachyarrhythmias, treatment options, and clinical management strategies for these patients.

Electrocardiographic Predictors of Complete Heart Block During Right Ventricular Lead Implantation in Patients Who Underwent Cardiac Resynchronization Therapy

Cardiac resynchronization therapy (CRT) device procedures have their own complications in addition to the complications associated with standard pacemaker implantations. This study aimed to analyze the predictors of the right bundle branch injury resulting in complete heart block (CHB) during right ventricular (RV) lead implantation in patients who underwent CRT with defibrillator. We conducted an observational study of consecutive 790 patients who underwent CRT with defibrillator device implantation at our institution from 2010 to 2022. Relevant clinical information and complete data regarding the echocardiographic data, implantation procedure, and clinical follow-up were collected into a computerized database. A total of 29 patients (3.7%) had CHB during RV lead implantation. In multivariate analysis, left axis deviation (odds ratio [OR] 2.408, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.025 to 5.658, p = 0.044), QRS width (OR 1.022, 95% CI 1.001 to 1.043, p = 0.035) and QRS alternans (OR 4.214, 95% CI 1.788 to 9.930, p = 0.001) were found independently related to right bundle branch injury resulting in CHB development during RV lead implantation. In conclusion, left axis deviation, QRS width, and QRS alternans were associated with a higher rate of CHB, and these findings provide insight into optimal and safe CRT device implantation strategies based on preprocedural characteristics.

Arrhythmic syncope: From diagnosis to management

Syncope is a concerning symptom that affects a large proportion of patients. It can be related to a heterogeneous group of pathologies ranging from trivial causes to diseases with a high risk of sudden death. However, benign causes are the most frequent, and identifying high-risk patients with potentially severe etiologies is crucial to establish an accurate diagnosis, initiate effective therapy, and alter the prognosis. The term cardiac syncope refers to those episodes where the cause of the cerebral hypoperfusion is directly related to a cardiac disorder, while arrhythmic syncope is cardiac syncope specifically due to rhythm disorders. Indeed, arrhythmias are the most common cause of cardiac syncope. Both bradyarrhythmia and tachyarrhythmia can cause a sudden decrease in cardiac output and produce syncope. In this review, we summarized the main guidelines in the management of patients with syncope of presumed arrhythmic origin. Therefore, we presented a thorough approach to syncope work-up through different tests depending on the clinical characteristics of the patients, risk stratification, and the management of syncope in different scenarios such as structural heart disease and channelopathies.

Bedside Carotid Sinus Massage for Syncope Evaluation With Bifascicular Block and First-Degree Atrioventricular Block

Symptomatic bifascicular block (BFB) with a reversible high-grade atrioventricular block (AVB) is an overlooked cause of syncope with differing diagnostic and therapeutic approaches. We present a case of a 79-year-old gentleman with multiple episodes of cardiac syncope. Initial electrocardiogram revealed a left bundle branch block and first-degree AVB worsened by bedside carotid sinus massage (CSM) obviating the need for electrophysiologic (EP) studies or continuous electrocardiographic monitoring for further evaluation. This case highlights the importance of CSM as a useful clinical tool in addition to EP studies and internal loop recorder (ILR) placement for assessment and appropriateness of permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation. It also sheds light on the differing management protocols between EP studies and ILR evaluation versus empiric PPM implantation for patients with cardiac syncope secondary to BFB and AVB.

Impact of bundle branch block morphology on outcomes of patients with syncope and bifascicular block: A SPRITELY (POST 3) substudy

BACKGROUND

Permanent pacing is often considered for patients with syncope and bifascicular block.

OBJECTIVE

The purpose of this study was to determine whether QRS morphology or other electrocardiographic characteristics can identify patients who may benefit from permanent pacing.

METHODS

The Syncope: Pacing or Recording in the Later Years (SPRITELY) trial was a multicenter trial that randomized patients with bifascicular block and syncope (n = 115) to empiric pacemaker implantation vs implantable loop recorder (ILR) monitoring. In this SPRITELY subanalysis, baseline 12-lead electrocardiograms were evaluated for bundle branch block (BBB) morphology, QRS width, and PR and QT intervals and their impact on clinical outcomes was assessed.

RESULTS

There were 41 patients with left BBB (36%), 69 patients with right bundle branch block (RBBB) and left anterior fascicular block (60%), and 5 patients with RBBB and left posterior fascicular block (4%). Pacemaker implant compared with ILR was associated with a significant reduction of major study-related events (MSREs) in both patients with left BBB (23.8% vs 78.9%; P = .001) and those with RBBB (27% vs 72.9%; P < .0001). Similarly, a reduction of MSREs was observed in both patients with trifascicular block (23% vs 84.6%; P < .0001) and those with bifascicular block (26.6% vs 68.9%; P = .002). In the group randomized to ILR monitoring, the type of BBB was not a predictor of recurrent syncope (P = .30), bradycardia requiring pacemaker (P = .15), or MSREs (P = .42). The presence of PR interval prolongation or QRS width in this group did not predict MSREs (P = .22 and P = .96, respectively).

CONCLUSION

In patients with syncope and bifascicular block, pacemaker implantation reduces adverse events as compared with ILR monitoring, irrespective of the type of BBB or the presence of PR interval prolongation.

Arrhythmic risk in single or recurrent episodes of unexplained syncope with complete bundle branch block

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES

Patients with a single syncopal episode (SSE) and complete bundle branch block (cBBB) are frequently managed more conservatively than patients with recurrent episodes (RSE). The objective of this study was to analyze if there are differences between patients with single or recurrent unexplained syncope and cBBB in arrhythmic risk, the diagnostic yield of tests, and clinical outcomes.

METHODS

Cohort study of consecutive patients with unexplained syncope and cBBB with a median follow-up time of 3 years. The patients were evaluated via a stepwise workup protocol based on electrophysiological study (EPS) and long-term follow-up with an implantable cardiac monitor.

RESULTS

Of the 503 patients included in the study, 238 (47.3%) had had only 1 syncopal episode. The risk of an arrhythmic syncope was similar in both groups (58.8% in SSE vs 57.0% in RSE; P=.68), also after adjustment for possible confounding variables (HR, 1.06; 95%CI, 0.81-1.38; P=.674). No significant differences between the groups were found in the EPS results and implantable cardiac monitor diagnostic yield. A total of 141 (59.2%) patients with SSE and 154 (58.1%) patients with RSE required cardiac device implantation (P=.797). After appropriate treatment, 35 (7%) patients had recurrence of syncope. The recurrence rate and mortality were also similar in both groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with cBBB and unexplained syncope are at high risk of an arrhythmic etiology, even after the first syncopal episode. Patients with SSE and RSE have a similar arrhythmic risk and similar outcomes, and therefore there is no clinical justification for not managing them in the same manner.

Sex-Related Differences in Patients With Unexplained Syncope and Bundle Branch Block: Lower Risk of AV Block and Lesser Need for Cardiac Pacing in Women

Objective

To analyze if there are sex-related differences in patients with unexplained syncope and bundle branch block (BBB).

Background

Despite increasing awareness that sex is a major determinant of the incidence, etiology, and the outcomes of different arrhythmias, no studies have examined differences in presentation and outcomes between men and women with syncope and BBB.

Methods

Cohort study of consecutive patients with unexplained syncope and BBB was included from January 2010 to January 2021 with a median follow-up time of 3.4 years [interquartile range (IQR) 1.7–6.0 years]. They were evaluated by a stepwise workup protocol based on electrophysiological study (EPS) and long-term follow-up with an implantable cardiac monitor (ICM).

Results

Of the 443 patients included in the study, 165 (37.2%) were women. Compared with men, women had less diabetes (25.5 vs. 39.9%, p = 0.002) and less history of ischemic heart disease (IHD; 13.3 vs. 25.9%, p = 0.002). Left bundle branch block (LBBB) was more frequent in women (55.2 vs. 27.7%, p < 0.001) while right bundle branch block (RBBB) was more frequent in men (41.5 vs. 67.7%, p < 0.001). His to ventricle (HV) interval in the EPS was shorter in women (58 ms [IQR 52–71] vs. 60 ms [IQR 52–73], p = 0.035) and less women had an HV interval longer than 70 ms (28.5 vs. 38.1%, p = 0.039), however, EPS and ICM offered a similar diagnostic yield in both sexes (40.6 vs. 48.9% and 48.4% vs. 51.1%, respectively). Women had a lower risk of developing atrioventricular block (AVB) (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.44–95% CI 0.26–0.74, p = 0.002) and of requiring permanent pacemaker implantation (adjusted hazard ratio [HR] 0.72–95% CI: 0.52–0.99, p = 0.046). The mortality rate was lower in women (4.5 per 100 person-years [95% CI 3.1–6.4 per 100 person-years] vs. 7.3 per 100 person-years [95% CI 5.9–9.1 per 100 person-years]).

Conclusions

Compared to men, women with unexplained syncope and BBB have a lower risk of AVB and of requiring cardiac pacing. A stepwise diagnostic approach has a similar diagnostic yield in both sexes, and it seems appropriate to guide the treatment and avoid unnecessary pacemaker implantation, especially in women.

Cardiac monitoring for patients with palpitations

Palpitations are one of the most common reasons for medical consultation. They tend to worry patients and can affect their quality of life. They are often a symptom associated with cardiac rhythm disorders, although there are other etiologies. For diagnosis, it is essential to be able to reliably correlate the symptoms with an electrocardiographic record allowing the identification or ruling out of a possible rhythm disorder. However, reaching a diagnosis is not always simple, given that they tend to be transitory symptoms and the patient is frequently asymptomatic at the time of assessment. In recent years, electrocardiographic monitoring systems have incorporated many technical improvements that solve several of the 24-h Holter monitor limitations. The objective of this review is to provide an update on the different monitoring methods currently available, remarking their indications and limitations, to help healthcare professionals to appropriately select and use them in the work-up of patients with palpitations.

Etiology and prognosis of patients with unexplained syncope and mid-range left ventricular dysfunction

BACKGROUND

Syncope in patients with mid-range left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) can be due to potentially serious arrhythmic causes. However, there is no clear consensus on the best way to manage these patients.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this study were to determine the causes of syncope and assess the diagnostic yield and safety of a stepwise workup protocol in this population.

METHODS

This was a prospective observational study. A stepwise workup protocol was applied to patients with LVEF 35%-50% and unexplained syncope after the initial assessment (step 1).

RESULTS

One hundred four patients were included {median age 75.6 years; (interquartile range [IQR] 67.6-81.2 years); median LVEF 45% (IQR 40%-48%); median follow-up 2.0 years (IQR 0.7-3.3 years). In 71 patients (68.3%), a diagnosis was reached: 55 (77.5%) in step 2 (hospital admission and electrophysiology study) and 16 (36.5%) in step 3 (implantable cardiac monitor). Arrhythmic causes were the most common etiology (45.2% auriculoventricular block and 9.6% ventricular tachycardia). Sixty patients (57.7%) required the implantation of a cardiac device and 11 had a defibrillation function. Patients diagnosed in step 3 had a higher global risk of recurrence of syncope (hazard ratio 6.5; 95% confidence interval 2.3-18.0). The mortality rate was 8.1 per 100 person-years, and the sudden or unknown death rate was 0.9 per 100 person-years.

CONCLUSION

In patients with mid-range left ventricular dysfunction and syncope of unknown cause, a systematic diagnostic strategy based on electrophysiology study and/or implantable cardiac monitor implantation allows a diagnosis to be reached in a high proportion of cases and guides the treatment. Arrhythmia is the most common cause of syncope in this population, particularly auriculoventricular block.

Predictors of positive electrophysiological study in patients with syncope and bundle branch block: PR interval and type of conduction disturbance

BACKGROUND

Electrophysiological study (EPS) is indicated in patients with syncope and bundle branch block (BBB). Data about predictors of positive EPS in these patients is scarce.

OBJECTIVE

To assess clinical and electrocardiographic (ECG) predictors of positive EPS in patients with syncope and BBB.

METHODS

Observational single-center study that included all consecutive patients with syncope and BBB that underwent EPS from January 2011 to June 2017. Results of EPS were considered positive according to current ESC syncope guidelines.

RESULTS

During study period, 271 patients were included (64.9% male, age: 73.9 ± 12.2 years, number of syncopal episodes: 2.4 ± 2.5, LVEF: 56.1 ± 9.9%). Type of BBB: RBBB + LAFB/LPFB in 39.8%, isolated LBBB in 38.7% and isolated RBBB in 18.5% of the patients. Duration of QRS and PR interval were 141.9 ± 16.7 and 182.8 ± 52.2 milliseconds. EPS was positive in 41.7% of the patients. In multivariate analysis, conduction disturbance pattern and long PR interval (OR 8.6; 2.9-25; P < 0.0001) were predictors of positive EPS. Conduction disturbance patterns related with positive EPS were: BBB different than isolated RBBB (OR 15.2; 2.2-23.4; P = 0.005), LBBB or RBBB+long PR + left fascicular block (OR 4.5; 1.06-20.01; P < 0.042), and RBBB+left fascicular block compared with LBBB (OR 4.8; 1.2-16.7; P = 0.025). Clinical factors and syncope characteristics were not related with EPS result.

CONCLUSIONS

Diagnostic yield of EPS in patients with syncope and BBB is moderate (41%). Type of conduction disturbance pattern and PR interval are associated with the electrophysiological (EP) test result. Patients with LBBB or bifascicular block have the highest rate of positive EP test. Long PR interval increases the proportion of positive EPS in all conduction disturbance patterns.