AIM: Recurrent syncope often remains unexplained despite extensive multidisciplinary screening. The implantable loop recorder (ILR) may be a tool to define the cardiac arrhythmias underlying syncope. METHODS AND RESULTS: The study population consisted of 43 consecutive patients with unexplained syncope who underwent extensive cardiological screening and were followed with an ILR. During follow-up, 5 patients had only presyncope, 4 had palpitations, and 15 had a true recurrence of syncope. In all patients with palpitations, 3 with presyncope, and 7 with a recurrence of syncope, the ILR excluded arrhythmias. In the patients with a true recurrence, 1 had symptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) treated with drugs, 1 had polymorphic ventricular tachycardia (VT) and received an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD), and 7 had asystole and received a pacemaker. Two patients with presyncope received a pacemaker for Mobitz II block and PAF with brady-tachycardia syndrome. One asymptomatic patient received a pacemaker for significant nocturnal asystole recorded by ILR. Abnormalities in the cardiac screening were observed both in patients with and without syncope, but none of these had a predictive value. CONCLUSION: The ILR is a valuable and effective tool to establish an arrhythmic cause for unexplained syncope. The results of head-up tilt testing (HUTT) and electrophysiological study (EPS) are neither sufficiently sensitive nor specific enough in this patient group.
AIM: Recurrent syncope often remains unexplained despite extensive multidisciplinary screening. The implantable loop recorder (ILR) may be a tool to define the cardiac arrhythmias underlying syncope. METHODS AND RESULTS: The study population consisted of 43 consecutive patients with unexplained syncope who underwent extensive cardiological screening and were followed with an ILR. During follow-up, 5 patients had only presyncope, 4 had palpitations, and 15 had a true recurrence of syncope. In all patients with palpitations, 3 with presyncope, and 7 with a recurrence of syncope, the ILR excluded arrhythmias. In the patients with a true recurrence, 1 had symptomatic paroxysmal atrial fibrillation (PAF) treated with drugs, 1 had polymorphic ventricular tachycardia (VT) and received an implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD), and 7 had asystole and received a pacemaker. Two patients with presyncope received a pacemaker for Mobitz II block and PAF with brady-tachycardia syndrome. One asymptomatic patient received a pacemaker for significant nocturnal asystole recorded by ILR. Abnormalities in the cardiac screening were observed both in patients with and without syncope, but none of these had a predictive value. CONCLUSION: The ILR is a valuable and effective tool to establish an arrhythmic cause for unexplained syncope. The results of head-up tilt testing (HUTT) and electrophysiological study (EPS) are neither sufficiently sensitive nor specific enough in this patient group.
Authors: Jarno Riistama; Juho Väisänen; Sami Heinisuo; Hanna Harjunpää; Satu Arra; Kati Kokko; Maunu Mäntylä; Jutta Kaihilahti; Pekka Heino; Minna Kellomäki; Outi Vainio; Jukka Vanhala; Jukka Lekkala; Jari Hyttinen Journal: Med Biol Eng Comput Date: 2007-10-11 Impact factor: 2.602
Authors: B Brembilla-Perrot; C Suty-Selton; F Alla; P Y Zinzius; H Blangy; B Azman; A Terrier de la Chaise; P Louis; L Groben; K Djaballah; O Selton; S Magalhaes; L Muresan; J Cedano; A Abdelaal; N Sadoul Journal: Heart Asia Date: 2010-07-29