TY - JOUR
T1 - Safety and efficacy of leadless pacemaker for cardioinhibitory vasovagal syncope
AU - Turagam, Mohit K.
AU - Gopinathannair, Rakesh
AU - Park, Peter H.
AU - Tummala, Rangarao V.
AU - Vasamreddy, Chandrasekhar
AU - Shah, Alap
AU - Koerber, Scott
AU - Krauthammer, Yoaav
AU - Di Biase, Luigi
AU - Murtaza, Ghulam
AU - Akella, Krishna
AU - Atkins, Donita
AU - Bommana, Sudharani
AU - Kodwani, Naresh
AU - Romero, Jorge
AU - Al-Ahmad, Amin
AU - Lakkireddy, Prajwala
AU - Della Rocca, Domenico G.
AU - Mohanty, Sanghamitra
AU - Gwon, Yeongjin
AU - Natale, Andrea
AU - Lakkireddy, Dhanunjaya R.
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 Heart Rhythm Society
PY - 2020/9
Y1 - 2020/9
N2 - Background: Single-chamber leadless pacemakers (LPs) have been shown to be an effective alternative to conventional transvenous pacemakers (CTPs), but their benefit in the context of cardioinhibitory vasovagal syncope (CI-VVS) is unknown. Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of LP compared with dual-chamber CTP for CI-VVS. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, retrospective study comparing patients who received LP or dual-chamber CTP for drug-refractory CI-VVS. CI-VVS was diagnosed clinically and supported by cardiac monitoring and head-up tilt table testing. The primary efficacy endpoint was freedom from syncope during follow-up. Secondary endpoints included device efficacy and safety estimated by device-related major and minor adverse events (AEs). Results: Seventy-two patients (24 LP, 48 CTP; age 32 ± 5.5 years; 90% female; syncope frequency 7.6 ± 3.4 per year) were included. At 1 year, 91% of patients (22/24) in the LP group and 94% of patients (43/48) in the CTP group met the primary efficacy endpoint (P =.7). Device efficacy endpoint was met in 92% of the LP group and 98% of the CTP group (P =.2). Early major AEs occurred in 2 of 24 in the LP group and 3 of 48 in the CTP group (P =.4). Late major AEs occurred in 0 of 24 in the LP group and 2 of 48 in the CTP group (P = 1). Conclusion: In patients with CI-VVS, single-chamber LP demonstrated equivalent efficacy in reducing syncopal events compared to dual-chamber CTP, with a similar safety profile.
AB - Background: Single-chamber leadless pacemakers (LPs) have been shown to be an effective alternative to conventional transvenous pacemakers (CTPs), but their benefit in the context of cardioinhibitory vasovagal syncope (CI-VVS) is unknown. Objective: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and efficacy of LP compared with dual-chamber CTP for CI-VVS. Methods: We conducted a multicenter, retrospective study comparing patients who received LP or dual-chamber CTP for drug-refractory CI-VVS. CI-VVS was diagnosed clinically and supported by cardiac monitoring and head-up tilt table testing. The primary efficacy endpoint was freedom from syncope during follow-up. Secondary endpoints included device efficacy and safety estimated by device-related major and minor adverse events (AEs). Results: Seventy-two patients (24 LP, 48 CTP; age 32 ± 5.5 years; 90% female; syncope frequency 7.6 ± 3.4 per year) were included. At 1 year, 91% of patients (22/24) in the LP group and 94% of patients (43/48) in the CTP group met the primary efficacy endpoint (P =.7). Device efficacy endpoint was met in 92% of the LP group and 98% of the CTP group (P =.2). Early major AEs occurred in 2 of 24 in the LP group and 3 of 48 in the CTP group (P =.4). Late major AEs occurred in 0 of 24 in the LP group and 2 of 48 in the CTP group (P = 1). Conclusion: In patients with CI-VVS, single-chamber LP demonstrated equivalent efficacy in reducing syncopal events compared to dual-chamber CTP, with a similar safety profile.
KW - Asystole
KW - Leadless pacemaker
KW - Syncope
KW - Vasovagal syncope
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85090024595&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.hrthm.2020.05.006
DO - 10.1016/j.hrthm.2020.05.006
M3 - Article
C2 - 32389681
AN - SCOPUS:85090024595
SN - 1547-5271
VL - 17
SP - 1575
EP - 1581
JO - Heart Rhythm
JF - Heart Rhythm
IS - 9
ER -