Implantable cardioverter defibrillator utilization among device recipients presenting exclusively with syncope or near-syncope

Recommendations for the use of electrophysiological study: Update 2018

The field of cardiac electrophysiology has greatly developed during the past decades. Consequently, the use of electrophysiological studies (EPSs) in clinical practice has also significantly augmented, with a progressively increasing number of certified electrophysiology centers and specialists. Since Zipes et al published the Guidelines for Clinical Intracardiac Electrophysiology and Catheter Ablation Procedures in 1995, no official document summarizing current EPS indications has been published. The current paper focuses on summarizing all relevant data of the role of EPS in patients with different types of cardiac pathologies and provides up-to-date recommendations on this topic. For this purpose, the PubMed database was screened for relevant articles in English up to December 2018 and ESC and ACC/AHA Clinical Practice Guidelines, and EHRA/HRS/APHRS position statements related to the current topic were analyzed. Current recommendations for the use of EPS in clinical practice are discussed and presented in 17 distinct cardiac pathologies. A short rationale, evidence, and indications are provided for each cardiac disease/group of diseases. In conclusion, because of its capability to establish a diagnosis in patients with a variety of cardiac pathologies, the EPS remains a useful tool in the evaluation of patients with cardiac arrhythmias and conduction disorders and is capable of establishing indications for cardiac device implantation and guide catheter ablation procedures.

Syncope in Patients with Organic Heart Disease

Patients with syncope and organic heart disease remain a small but important subset of those patients who experience transient loss of consciousness. These patients require thoughtful and complete evaluation in an attempt to better understand the mechanism of syncope and its relationship to the underlying disease, and to diagnose and treat both properly. The goal is to reduce the risk of further syncope, to improve long-term outcomes with respect to arrhythmic and total mortality, and to improve patients' quality of life.

The prevalence and prognostic significance of near syncope and syncope: a prospective study of 395 cases in an emergency department (the SPEED study)

BACKGROUND

The prognostic significance of near-syncope has not yet been adequately characterized.

METHOD

We collected prospective data on a consecutive series of patients seen in an emergency department with syncope (brief loss of consciousness, usually with loss of muscle tone) or near-syncope (a feeling that syncope is about to occur, but without actual loss of consciousness or muscle tone). We report on the prevalence, etiology, and prognosis of such events (the SPEED study). Patients were followed up at 30 days and at 6 months after the event.

RESULTS

From 17 July to 31 October 2011, 395 patients were seen in the emergency department for a chief complaint of syncope or near-syncope (3% of all emergency patients). Their median age was 70 years, and 55% were men. 62% had experienced syncope, and 38% near-syncope. The patients with near-syncope were younger than those with syncope ( 63 vs. 72 years, p < 0.014) and were also more commonly male (63% vs. 49%, p = 0.006). The two patient groups did not differ significantly with respect to their measured laboratory values and vital parameters or their accompanying medical conditions. Hospitalizations were more common for syncope than for near-syncope (86% vs. 70%, p < 0.001). Etiologies were similarly distributed in the two patient groups, with the main ones being reflex syncope, orthostatic syncope, cardiac syncope, and syncope of uncertain origin. In all, 123 of 379 patients (32%) had further undesired events within 30 days of the event. Multivariable logistic regression revealed that age, heart rate, and renal dysfunction were independent predictors of undesired events, while the type of syncope was not.

CONCLUSION

Patients with near-syncope do not differ to any large extent from patients with syncope with respect to the features studied. The diagnostic evaluation should be similar for patients in the two groups.

Sudden death risk in syncope: the role of the implantable cardioverter defibrillator

Syncope is generally benign but when it is due to an underlying cardiovascular condition, the prognosis can be guarded. Patients with syncope may be at risk of dying suddenly from a ventricular arrhythmia especially if the collapse is caused by a poorly-tolerated, self-terminating, ventricular tachycardia (VT). If a similar VT recurs, and persists, it could initiate cardiac arrest, leading to sudden cardiac death. However, distinguishing which patient with syncope may benefit most from implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy, which can stop life-threatening and poorly tolerated VT, thereby preventing sudden cardiac death, remains an ongoing challenge. Careful assessment of the patient's underlying cardiovascular conditions, scrupulous attention to historical detail to assess potential causes for syncope, and risk stratification based upon clinical characteristics and short and long-term risks can help. This review focuses on the sudden death risk in patients with syncope and explores the role of the ICD to treat ventricular arrhythmias, prevent symptoms, and prevent death.

Do outcomes of near syncope parallel syncope?

BACKGROUND

Limited information on the evaluation of emergency department (ED) patients complaining of "near syncope" exists. Multiple studies of syncope exclude near syncope claiming near syncope is poorly defined and its definition is nonuniform.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to determine the incidence of critical interventions or adverse outcomes associated with near syncope and compare these outcomes with syncope.

METHODS

Prospective, observational study enrolling (August 2007-October 2008) consecutive ED patients (age, ≥18 years) presenting with near syncope was conducted. Near syncope was defined as an episode in which the patient felt they might lose consciousness but did not. Critical intervention/adverse outcome was defined as hemorrhage, cardiac ischemia/intervention, alteration in antidysrhythmics, pacemaker/defibrillator placement, sepsis, stroke, death, dysrhythmia, sepsis, pulmonary embolus, or carotid stenosis. Primary outcome was an adverse outcome or critical intervention in hospital or less than 30 days. Near syncope and syncope outcomes and admission rates were compared using the χ(2) test.

RESULTS

After 1870 patients were screened, 244 met the study definition. Of the 244 patients, follow-up was achieved in 242 (99%). Emergency department hospitalization or 30-day adverse outcomes occurred in 49 (20%) of 244 compared with 68 (23%) of 293 of patients with syncope (P = .40). The most common adverse outcomes/critical interventions were hemorrhage (n = 6), bradydysrhythmia (n = 6), alteration in antidysrhythmics (n = 6), and sepsis (n = 10). Of patients with near syncope, 49% were admitted compared with 69% with syncope (P = .001).

CONCLUSION

Patients with near syncope are as likely those with syncope to experience critical interventions or adverse outcomes; however, near-syncope patients are less likely to be admitted. Given similar risk of adverse outcomes for near syncope and syncope, future studies are warranted to improve the treatment of ED patients with near syncope.

Implantable cardioverter defibrillator discharge rates in patients with unexplained syncope, structural heart disease, and inducible ventricular tachycardia at electrophysiologic study

BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESIS

The implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) is the best available strategy to protect patients from life-threatening ventricular arrhythmia. Although unproven, it is commonly utilized to treat subjects with syncope, a negative clinical workup, structural heart disease, and inducible sustained monomorphic ventricular tachycardia (VT) on programmed electrophysiologic stimulation (EPS). The purpose of this paper was to validate this approach.

METHODS

We retrospectively identified 36 subjects who received primary ICD therapy for syncope in the setting of structural heart disease with inducible sustained monomorphic VT on EPS. The cohort was predominantly male (32/36) with underlying coronary artery disease (29/36). The mean left ventricular ejection fraction was 31 +/- 12%, and a third of the patients (12/36) had undergone bypass surgery.

RESULTS

The study group was followed for a mean of 23 +/- 15 months (range 3-81 months) and experienced an ICD event rate of 22% at 3 months, which increased to 55% at 36 months. This event rate was comparable with the 66% event rate seen in a group of patients with primary ICD therapy for spontaneous life-threatening VT treated during the same time period. No future predictors of ICD events in the study group could be identified.

CONCLUSION

Syncope patients with negative workup, structural heart disease, and sustained monomorphic VT at EPS are at high risk for future tachyarrhythmic events. Based on present evidence, primary ICD therapy in this group appears warranted and justified.

Syncope predicts the outcome of cardiomyopathy patients: analysis of the SCD-HeFT study

OBJECTIVES

The outcome of congestive heart failure (CHF) patients with syncope is understood incompletely.

BACKGROUND

We analyzed data from patients enrolled in the SCD-HeFT (Sudden Cardiac Death Heart Failure Trial) to determine whether syncope predicted outcomes in patients with CHF.

METHODS

We compared outcomes (and associated clinical characteristics) in patients with and without syncope enrolled in SCD-HeFT.

RESULTS

In SCD-HeFT, 162 (6%) patients had syncope before randomization, 356 (14%) had syncope after randomization (similar incidence in each randomized arm), and 46 (2%) had syncope before and after randomization. A QRS duration >or=120 ms and absence of beta-blocker use predicted syncope during follow-up (hazard ratio [HR] 1.30 and 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.06 to 1.61, p = 0.014 and HR 1.25, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.56, p = 0.048, respectively). Syncope recurrence did not differ by randomization arm. However, in the implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) arm, syncope, before and after randomization, was associated with appropriate ICD discharges (HR 1.75, 95% CI 1.10 to 2.80, p = 0.019 and HR 2.91, 95% CI 1.89 to 4.47, p = 0.001, respectively). Post-randomization syncope predicted total and cardiovascular death (HR 1.41, 95% CI 1.13 to 1.76, p = 0.002 and HR 1.55, 95% CI 1.19 to 2.02, p = 0.001, respectively). The elevated relative risk of mortality for syncope versus non-syncope patients did not vary significantly across treatment arms (ICD, HR 1.54, 95% CI 1.04 to 2.27; amiodarone, HR 1.33, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.93; and placebo, HR 1.39, 95% CI 0.96 to 2.02, test for difference p = 0.86).

CONCLUSIONS

For CHF patients with ICDs, syncope was associated with appropriate ICD activations. Syncope was associated with increased mortality risk in SCD-HeFT regardless of treatment arm (placebo, amiodarone, or ICD).

Syncope in the elderly

Syncope is common and costly especially in the elderly. Presentation and prevalence may be different compared with the young. Etiologies can be difficult to confirm but it is not a hopeless morass. The history, physical exam, and ECG have the greatest utility. Additional studies should be used sparingly and based on the initial data. Successful response to treatment is difficult to predict.

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.

Programmed ventricular stimulation in patients with idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy and syncope receiving implantable cardioverter-defibrillators: a case series and a systematic review of the literature

BACKGROUND

The role of programmed ventricular stimulation (PVS) in patients with idiopathic dilated cardiomyopathy (DCM) and syncope receiving implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICD) remains controversial.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Between 1994 and July 2002, 20 patients with DCM and syncope underwent PVS and ICD implantation at the Onassis Cardiac Surgery Center or the Alexandra General Hospital. At PVS 10 patients had inducible sustained monomorphic ventricular tachycardia (SMVT), 3 patients had inducible sustained polymorphic ventricular tachycardia or ventricular fibrillation, and 7 patients had no inducible arrhythmia. The latter 7 patients received an ICD because of clinical occurrence of ventricular tachycardia (n=5) or fibrillation (n=2). Mean age was 55+/-14 years; 80% were men. During a mean follow-up of 2.8+/-2.3 years, 12 of the 20 patients received an appropriate shock. The incidence of appropriate shocks at 1 and 3 years was 69% and 84% in the inducible SMVT group, and 56% and 67% in the group without inducible SMVT (p=0.93, log rank test). Overall survival was similar in both groups (p=0.53). In a systematic review of the published literature 18 of 75 (24%) patients with DCM, syncope and a negative PVS had an appropriate ICD shock after a mean follow-up of 27 months.

CONCLUSION

PVS has a limited role in risk stratification of patients with DCM and syncope.

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.

Limited predictive value of inducible sustained ventricular tachycardia for future occurrence of spontaneous ventricular tachycardia in patients with coronary artery disease and relatively preserved cardiac function

To evaluate the significance of inducible sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT) in patients with coronary artery disease and relatively preserved cardiac function, 33 patients who met the following criteria were studied; documented nonsustained VT but no history of life-threatening arrhythmia, inducible sustained VT at electrophysiologic study, and implantation of a cardioverter-defibrillator. Eighteen patients developed clinical sustained VT within 2 years. By univariate analysis, left ventricular ejection fraction (EF) and the cycle length of induced VT were associated with clinical VT occurrence. By multivariate analysis, however, EF was the only independent predictor. Among 23 patients with EF <or=40%, 16 patients developed clinical sustained VT compared to 2 of 10 patients with EF >40% (P <.01). In coronary artery disease patients with relatively preserved EF, the incidence of clinical VT is considerably low even though sustained VT is inducible. Inducible VT is therefore not appropriate for risk stratification in this patient population.

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.

Comparison of event rates and survival in patients with unexplained syncope without documented ventricular tachyarrhythmias versus patients with documented sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias both treated with implantable cardioverter-defibrillators

Patients with unexplained syncope and inducible ventricular tachyarrhythmias during electrophysiologic testing have an increased cardiac mortality rate. We compared event rates and survival of 178 patients with unexplained syncope and no documented ventricular arrhythmias (syncope group) versus 568 patients with documented sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT or fibrillation (VF) (VT/VF group) treated, as part of a lead (Ventritex TVL) investigation, with similar implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) capable of extensive data storage. The 2 groups shared similar clinical characteristics. The mean follow-up was 11 months for the syncope group and 14 months for the VT/VF group. The mean time from device implantation to first appropriate therapy was similar in the 2 groups (109 +/- 140 vs 93 +/- 131 days, p = 0.40). Actuarial probability of appropriate ICD therapy was 49% and 55% at 1 and 2 years, respectively, in syncope group and 49% and 58% in VT/VF group (p = 0.57). Recurrent syncope was associated with ventricular tachyarrhythmias in 85% and 92% of the syncope group and VT/VF group, respectively (p = 0.54). At 2 years, actuarial survival was 91% in the syncope group and 93% in VT/VF group (p = 0.85). We conclude that patients treated with ICD with unexplained syncope and induced VT/VF have an equally high incidence of appropriate ICD therapy and low mortality compared with similar patients with documented VT/VF. These findings, plus the high association between recurrent syncope and ventricular arrhythmias, indicate that VT/VF are likely etiologies in selected patients with unexplained syncope and support ICD therapy in such cases.

Implantable defibrillator event rates in patients with unexplained syncope and inducible sustained ventricular tachyarrhythmias: a comparison with patients known to have sustained ventricular tachycardia

OBJECTIVES

To assess the clinical significance of inducible ventricular tachyarrhythmias among patients with unexplained syncope.

BACKGROUND

Induction of sustained ventricular arrhythmias at electrophysiology study in patients with unexplained syncope and structural heart disease is usually assigned diagnostic significance. However, the true frequency of subsequent spontaneous ventricular tachyarrhythmias in the absence of antiarrhythmic medications is unknown.

METHODS

In a retrospective case-control study, the incidence of implantable cardiac defibrillator (ICD) therapies for sustained ventricular arrhythmias among patients with unexplained syncope or near syncope (syncope group, n = 22) was compared with that of a control group of patients (n = 32) with clinically documented sustained ventricular tachycardia (VT). Sustained ventricular arrhythmias were inducible in both groups and neither group received antiarrhythmic medications. All ICDs had stored electrograms or RR intervals. Clinical variables were similar between groups except that congestive cardiac failure was more common in the syncope group.

RESULTS

Kaplan-Meier analysis of the time to first appropriate ICD therapy for syncope and control groups produced overlapping curves (p = 0.9), with 57 +/- 11% and 50 +/- 9%, respectively, receiving ICD therapy by one year. In both groups, the induced arrhythmia was significantly faster than spontaneous arrhythmias, but the cycle lengths of induced and spontaneous arrhythmias were positively correlated (R = 0.6, p < 0.0001). During follow-up, three cardiac transplantations and seven deaths occurred in the syncope group, and two transplantations and five deaths occurred in the control group (36-month survival without transplant 52 +/- 11% and 83 +/- 7%, respectively, p = 0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

In patients with unexplained syncope, structural heart disease and inducible sustained ventricular arrhythmias, spontaneous sustained ventricular arrhythmias occur commonly and at a similar rate to patients with documented sustained VT. Thus, electrophysiologic testing in unexplained syncope can identify those at risk of potentially life-threatening tachyarrhythmias, and aggressive treatment of these patients is warranted.

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

OBJECTIVES

We evaluated the long-term outcome of patients with coronary artery disease and unexplained syncope who were treated with an electrophysiologic (EP)-guided approach.

BACKGROUND

Electrophysiologic studies are frequently performed to evaluate unexplained syncope in patients with coronary artery disease. Patients with this profile who have inducible ventricular tachycardia are considered at high risk for sudden death and increased overall mortality, and therefore are often treated with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD). The impact of this EP-guided strategy is unknown because there are no data comparing the long-term outcome of ICD recipients with that of noninducible patients.

METHODS

We evaluated 67 consecutive patients with coronary artery disease and unexplained syncope. All patients were treated with an EP-guided approach that included ICD implantation in patients with inducible ventricular tachycardia.

RESULTS

Electrophysiologic testing suggested a plausible diagnosis in 32 (48%) of these patients. Inducible monomorphic ventricular tachycardia was the most common abnormality. Despite frequent appropriate therapy with ICDs, the total mortality for patients with inducible monomorphic ventricular tachycardia was significantly higher than for noninducible patients. The respective one- and two-year survival rates were 94% and 84% in noninducible patients and 77% and 45% in inducible patients (p = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Electrophysiologic testing suggests an etiology for unexplained syncope in approximately 50% of patients and risk stratifies these patients with regard to long-term outcome. Patients who receive an ICD for the management of inducible ventricular tachycardia have a high incidence of spontaneous ventricular arrhythmias requiring ICD therapy. However, despite ICD implantation and frequent appropriate delivery of ICD therapies, patients with inducible ventricular tachycardia have a significantly worse prognosis than do those who are noninducible.

Outcome of patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy and unexplained syncope treated with an implantable defibrillator

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this study was to determine the outcome of patients with nonischemic dilated cardiomyopathy, unexplained syncope and a negative electrophysiology test who are treated with an implantable defibrillator.

BACKGROUND

Patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy and unexplained syncope may be at high risk for sudden cardiac death, and they are sometimes treated with an implantable defibrillator.

METHODS

This study prospectively determined the outcome of 14 consecutive patients who had a nonischemic cardiomyopathy, unexplained syncope and a negative electrophysiology test and who underwent defibrillator implantation (Syncope Group). Nineteen consecutive patients with a nonischemic cardiomyopathy and a cardiac arrest who were treated with a defibrillator (Arrest Group) served as a control group.

RESULTS

Seven of 14 patients (50%) in the Syncope Group received appropriate shocks for ventricular arrhythmias during a mean follow-up of 24+/-13 months, compared with 8 of 19 patients (42%) in the Arrest Group during a mean follow-up of 45+/-40 months (p = 0.1). The mean duration from device implantation until the first appropriate shock was 32+/-7 months (95% confidence interval [CI], 18 to 45 months) in the Syncope Group compared to 72+/-12 months (95% CI, 48 to 96 months) in the Arrest Group (p = 0.1). Among patients who received appropriate shocks, the mean time from defibrillator implantation to the first appropriate shock was 10+/-14 months in the Syncope Group, compared with 48+/-47 months in the Arrest Group (p = 0.06). Recurrent syncope was always associated with ventricular tachyarrhythmias.

CONCLUSIONS

The high incidence of appropriate defibrillator shocks and the association of recurrent syncope with ventricular arrhythmias support the treatment of patients with nonischemic cardiomyopathy, unexplained syncope and a negative electrophysiology test with an implantable defibrillator.