Long-term outcome of patients with unexplained syncope treated with an electrophysiologic-guided approach in the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator era

Value of EP Study and Other Cardiac Investigations

With the advent of implantable loop recorders capable of prolonged electrocardiographic monitoring, and following studies demonstrating the benefit of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator therapy in subgroups of patients with structural heart disease and depressed left ventricular function, the role of invasive cardiac electrophysiologic (EP) studies in patients with unexplained syncope has been substantially reduced. Nonetheless, in select high-risk patients presenting with unexplained syncope, EP studies still play an important role in identifying a diagnosis in these patients and assessing long-term risk of mortality.

Risk stratification for sudden cardiac death

Sudden cardiac death (SCD) is a leading cause of mortality in industrialized countries, and ventricular fibrillation and sustained ventricular tachycardia are the major causes of SCD. Although there are now effective devices and medications that can prevent such serious arrhythmias, it is crucial to have methods of identifying patients at risk. Numerous studies suggest that most patients dying of SCD have coronary artery disease or cardiomyopathy. Functional or electrophysiological measurements are effective in risk stratification. Left ventricular ejection fraction measured by echocardiography or cardiac imaging techniques is the gold standard to detect high-risk patients. Electrophysiological studies have also been used for risk stratification. Noninvasive techniques and measurements, such as T-wave alternans, signal-averaged electrocardiography, nonsustained ventricular tachycardia, heart rate variability, and heart rate turbulence, have been proposed as useful tools in identifying patients at risk for SCD. This article reviews the epidemiology, mechanisms, substrates, and current status of risk stratification of SCD.

Choosing pacemakers appropriately

The range of implantable cardiac pacing devices has expanded, with the advances in available technology. Indications for cardiac pacing devices, that is pacemakers, implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs) and cardiac resynchronisation therapy devices (CRTs), have expanded for the treatment, diagnosis and monitoring of bradycardia, tachycardia and heart failure. While the need for pacemakers is increasing, not all patients who require pacemakers are receiving them, especially in the Asia-Pacific region. There is a need to be more critical in advising the use of more expensive devices like ICDs and CRT/CRT-D devices, since most patients in the Asia-Pacific region pay out of pocket for these therapies. The AHA-ACC guidelines need not be blindly followed, since they are too wide-sweeping and are often based on the intention-to-treat basis of trials rather than on the parameters of the patients actually enrolled.

Sudden cardiac death: the role of risk stratification

Sudden cardiac death syndrome remains a major health problem responsible for approximately 400,000 deaths annually in the US. Effective therapies exist but are costly and are associated with potential complications. Currently used strategies for selection of the best candidates for implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy are imperfect and leave a large number of high-risk patients unprotected. At the same time, many patients who received ICDs will never develop tachyarrhythmia and require ICD intervention. The article summarizes the current status and applicability of the noninvasive and invasive tests used for sudden cardiac death risk assessment with the emphasis on the increasingly recognized value of microvolt T wave alternans.

Universal access -- but when? Treating the right patient at the right time: access to electrophysiology services in Canada

The Canadian Cardiovascular Society Access to Care Working Group has published a series of commentaries on access to cardiovascular care in Canada. The present article reviews the evidence for timely access to electrophysiology services. Using the best available evidence along with expert consensus by the Canadian Heart Rhythm Society, the panel proposed a series of benchmarks for access to the full scope of electrophysiology services, from initial consultation through to operative procedures. The proposed benchmarks are presented herein.

Syncope following cardioverter defibrillator implantation in patients with spontaneous syncopal monomorphic ventricular tachycardia

AIMS

We sought to determine the incidence, mechanisms, and time to syncope recurrence in patients with spontaneous syncopal monomorphic ventricular tachycardia (SyMVT) treated with an implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD).

METHODS AND RESULTS

Incidence and causes of syncope following ICD implantation in consecutive patients (n=26) with spontaneous SyMVT were compared with those found in consecutive patients (n=50) with spontaneous non-syncopal monomorphic ventricular tachycardia (NSyMVT). Patients with SyMVT had a higher incidence of syncope (46% patients) than those with NSyMVT (2% patients) at 31+/-21 and 34+/-23 months follow-up, respectively (hazard ratio, 0.19; 95% confidence interval, 0.04-0.42; P=0.0001). Among the former, four patients (15%) had non-arrhythmic syncope and eight patients had arrhythmic syncope (31%), which was associated with either ICD proarrhythmia (seven episodes of VT acceleration or VF degeneration by ATP or low/high-energy shocks in three patients) or spontaneous VT and VF (five episodes in five patients). Median time to the first arrhythmic syncope was 376 days. Arrhythmic syncope presented after a first non-syncopal VT recurrence in six patients (75%).

CONCLUSION

Syncope following ICD implantation is common in patients with SyMVT in contrast to patients with NSyMVT. Late syncope presentation supports reassessment of driving restrictions in this setting.

[Syncope and epileptic seizures]

Syncope is one of the most common symptoms leading to hospital admission. Thereby syncope can be induced by several diseases. It is crucial to detect underlying structural heart disease or high grade arrhythmias, as these are associated with an increased mortality. The careful history and physical examination can often give sufficient evidence to evaluate the origin of syncope. Additional examinations should only be applied selectively. In patients with structural heart disease the specific treatment should be initiated, in patients with cardiac arrhythmias the implantation of a pacemaker or ICD might be indicated. The most common neurally-mediated and orthostatic syncopes can often be treated successfully by physical training. Beside syncope epilepsy might be responsible for a transient loss of consciousness. Again careful history taking helps to differentiate between these two entities.

Usefulness of prolonged QRS duration to identify high-risk ischemic cardiomyopathy patients with syncope and inducible ventricular tachycardia

We evaluated 61 consecutive patients who had coronary artery disease, decreased left ventricular function, and syncope and underwent implantation of a cardioverter-defibrillator because sustained ventricular tachycardia was inducible at electrophysiologic testing. During a follow-up of 3.0 +/- 1.8 years, 23 patients (38%) developed ventricular tachycardia. Prolonged QRS duration (>/=120 ms) was the only significant predictor of arrhythmia. The 1- and 2-year rates without ventricular arrhythmia were 82% and 77%, respectively, in patients whose QRS duration was <120 ms. In contrast, 1- and 2-year rates without ventricular arrhythmia were only 64% and 51%, respectively, in patients whose QRS duration was >/=120 ms (risk ratio 3.7, 95% confidence interval 1.4 to 9.8, p = 0.0092).

Differences in mechanisms and outcomes of syncope in patients with coronary disease or idiopathic left ventricular dysfunction as assessed by electrophysiologic testing

OBJECTIVES

This study evaluated the causes of syncope and the significance and differences in left ventricular (LV) dysfunction, coronary disease, and idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM).

BACKGROUND

Risk stratification of and indications for an automated defibrillator could differ according to the cause of LV dysfunction.

METHODS

Electrophysiologic study, including atrial and ventricular programmed stimulation, was performed in 119 patients with coronary disease (group I) and 61 patients with DCM (group II) with an left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) <40% and syncope. Patients were followed from one to six years (mean 4 +/- 2 years).

RESULTS

Sustained monomorphic ventricular tachycardia (VT) was induced in 44 group I patients (37%) and 13 group II patients (21%); ventricular flutter (>270 beats/min) or ventricular fibrillation (VF) was induced in 24 group I patients (19%) and 9 group II patients (15%); and various other arrhythmias were identified. Syncope remained unexplained in 34 group I patients (30%) and 16 group II patients (27%). Prognosis depended on the heart disease: VT or VF induction was a predictive factor of mortality in coronary disease and identified a group with high cardiac mortality (46%), compared with patients with a negative study, who had a lower mortality (6%; p < 0.001) than in other studies. Cardiac mortality was only correlated with LVEF in DCM.

CONCLUSIONS

Various causes could explain syncope in 70% of patients with coronary disease and DCM, but differences were noted: VT was frequent in coronary disease with a bad prognosis, and ischemia could explain syncope; in DCM, different causes such as atrial tachycardia could be responsible for syncope, but the prognosis only depended on LVEF.

Cost implications of testing strategy in patients with syncope: randomized assessment of syncope trial

OBJECTIVES

We sought to assess the cost implications of two investigation strategies in patients with unexplained syncope.

BACKGROUND

Establishing a diagnosis in patients with unexplained syncope is complicated by infrequent and unpredictable events. The cost-effectiveness of immediate, prolonged monitoring as an alternative to conventional diagnostic strategies has not been studied.

METHODS

Sixty patients (age 66 +/- 14 years; 33 males) with unexplained syncope and LV ejection fraction >35% were randomized to conventional testing with an external loop recorder, tilt and electrophysiologic (EP) testing, or prolonged monitoring with an implantable loop recorder with one-year monitoring. If patients remained undiagnosed after their assigned strategy, they were offered a crossover to the alternate strategy. Cost analysis of the two testing strategies was performed.

RESULTS

Fourteen of 30 patients who were being monitored were diagnosed at a cost of 2,731 Canadian dollars +/- 285 Canadian dollars per patient and 5,852 Canadian dollars +/- 610 Canadian dollars per diagnosis. In contrast, only six of 30 conventional patients were diagnosed (20% vs. 47%, p = 0.029), at a cost of 1,683 Canadian dollars +/- 505 Canadian dollars per patient (p < 0.0001) and 8,414 Canadian dollars +/- 2,527 Canadian dollars per diagnosis (p < 0.0001). After crossover, a diagnosis was obtained in 1 of 5 patients undergoing conventional testing, compared with 8 of 21 patients who completed monitoring (20% vs. 38%, p = 0.44). Overall, a strategy of monitoring followed by tilt and EP testing was associated with a diagnostic yield of 50%, at a cost of 2,937 Canadian dollars +/- 579 Canadian dollars per patient and 5,875 Canadian dollars +/- 1,159 Canadian dollars per diagnosis. Conventional testing followed by monitoring was associated with a diagnostic yield of 47%, at a greater cost of 3,683 Canadian dollars +/- 1,490 Canadian dollars per patient (p = 0.013) and a greater cost per diagnosis (7,891 Canadian dollars +/- 3,193 Canadian dollars, p = 0.002).

CONCLUSIONS

A strategy of primary monitoring is more cost-effective than conventional testing in establishing a diagnosis in recurrent unexplained syncope.

Mechanism of syncope in patients with heart disease and negative electrophysiologic test

BACKGROUND

In patients with syncope and structural heart disease, syncope is suspected to be attributable to a primary cardiac arrhythmia, but little is known of its mechanism when electrophysiologic study is unremarkable.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We applied an implantable loop recorder in 35 patients with overt heart disease at risk of ventricular arrhythmia, because these were patients with previous myocardial infarction or cardiomyopathy with depressed ejection fraction or nonsustained ventricular tachycardia in whom an electrophysiologic study was unremarkable. During a follow-up of 3 to 15 months, syncope recurred in 6 patients (17%) after a mean of 6+/-5 months; in 3 patients, the mechanism of syncope was bradycardia with long pauses (sudden-onset AV block in 2 cases and sinus arrest in 1 case); in 1 patient, there was stable sinus tachycardia; and in 2 patients, who had chronic atrial fibrillation, there was an increase in ventricular rate. A total of 23 episodes of presyncope were documented in 8 patients (23%): no rhythm variation or mild tachycardia in 12 cases, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation or atrial tachycardia in 10 cases, and sustained ventricular tachycardia in 1 case. No patient died during the study period nor suffered from injury attributable to syncopal relapse.

CONCLUSIONS

The patients with unexplained syncope, structural heart disease, and negative electrophysiologic study had a favorable medium-term outcome with no case of death and a low recurrence rate of syncope without related injury. The mechanism of syncope was heterogeneous, and ventricular tachyarrhythmia was unlikely.

Significance of inducible ventricular fibrillation in patients with coronary artery disease and unexplained syncope

OBJECTIVES

This study was designed to determine the incidence and prognostic significance of inducible ventricular fibrillation (VF) in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and unexplained syncope.

BACKGROUND

Current American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association practice guidelines recommend implantation of internal cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) in patients with unexplained syncope in whom either ventricular tachycardia (VT) or VF is inducible during electrophysiologic (EP) testing. Although the prognostic significance of inducible monomorphic VT is known, the significance of inducible VF remains undefined.

METHODS

We evaluated 118 consecutive patients with CAD and unexplained syncope who underwent EP testing. Sustained monomorphic VT was inducible in 53 (45%) patients; in 20 (17%) patients, VF was the only inducible arrhythmia; and no sustained ventricular arrhythmia was inducible in the remaining 45 (38%) patients. The latter two groups of 65 (55%) patients make up the study population.

RESULTS

There were 16 deaths among the study population during a follow-up period of 25.3 +/- 19.6 months. The overall one- and two-year survival in these patients was 89% and 81%, respectively. No significant difference in survival was observed between patients with and without inducible VF (80% power to detect a fourfold survival difference).

CONCLUSIONS

In 17% of patients with CAD and unexplained syncope, VF is the only inducible ventricular arrhythmia. Within the limits of this pilot study, long-term follow-up of patients with and without inducible VF demonstrates no difference in survival between the two groups. Therefore, the practice of ICD implantation in patients with CAD, unexplained syncope and inducible VF, especially with triple ventricular extrastimuli, may merit reconsideration.

Catheter ablation of a monofocal premature ventricular complex triggering idiopathic ventricular fibrillation

A 62 year old man was admitted for evaluation of recurrent episodes of syncope. A surface ECG showed frequent repetitive premature ventricular complexes of right ventricular outflow tract origin. Ventricular fibrillation was inducible by programmed electrical stimulation but otherwise cardiac evaluation was unremarkable. A diagnosis of idiopathic ventricular fibrillation was made and an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) was installed. However, spontaneous ventricular fibrillation recurred, requiring repeated ICD discharges. The ventricular fibrillation was reproducibly triggered by a single premature ventricular complex with a specific QRS morphology. Radiofrequency catheter ablation was carried out to eradicate this complex. No ventricular fibrillation has developed after this procedure, and the patient does not require drug treatment.

Catheter ablation of a monofocal premature ventricular complex triggering idiopathic ventricular fibrillation

A 62 year old man was admitted for evaluation of recurrent episodes of syncope. A surface ECG showed frequent repetitive premature ventricular complexes of right ventricular outflow tract origin. Ventricular fibrillation was inducible by programmed electrical stimulation but otherwise cardiac evaluation was unremarkable. A diagnosis of idiopathic ventricular fibrillation was made and an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) was installed. However, spontaneous ventricular fibrillation recurred, requiring repeated ICD discharges. The ventricular fibrillation was reproducibly triggered by a single premature ventricular complex with a specific QRS morphology. Radiofrequency catheter ablation was carried out to eradicate this complex. No ventricular fibrillation has developed after this procedure, and the patient does not require drug treatment.

Syncope

Syncope is a common clinical presentation. Although most commonly benign, it may herald a pathology with a poor prognosis. The work-up of syncope includes a careful history, physical examination, electrocardiogram, risk stratification, and appropriately directed testing. The key factor in the investigation of syncope is the presence (or absence) of structural heart disease or an abnormal electrocardiogram. The most useful investigation in unexplained syncope with a normal heart is the tilt table test for evaluating predisposition to neurocardiogenic (vasovagal) syncope. In the setting of structural heart disease or an abnormal electrocardiogram, electrophysiologic studies play a more important role. The utility of noninvasive cardiac monitoring for symptom-rhythm correlation may be limited by infrequent symptoms. The availability of external and implantable loop recorders allows prolonged periods of monitoring to increase diagnostic yield. The management of patients with syncope may be complex. Early referral to a cardiac electrophysiologist is warranted in patients who are at high risk.