BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic value and safety of sublingual isosorbid dinitrate (ISDN) with intravenous isoproterenol (ISOP) during head-up tilt table testing (HUTT) in pediatric patients with suspected neurocardiogenic syncope. METHODS: One hundred thirty-six consecutive pediatric patients complaining of presyncope or syncope were submitted to HUTT for the first time. Those who did not develop syncope or presyncope during passive HUTT for 20 minutes underwent repeated HUTT with either 1.25 to 2.5 mg sublingual ISDN or intravenous ISOP (1-3 mug/min) for 20 minutes. There were 54 boys and 82 girls, aged 10 to 18 years with an average of 15.5 +/- 2.4 years and a median of 16 years. Among the patients with cardioinhibition or mixed responses, the severity of the bradyarrhythmia was scored 1 to 3 (restoration of effective rhythm within 10 seconds, 10-20 seconds, and >20 seconds while back to supine position, respectively). RESULTS: During the passive period, 24 (17.6%) of 136 patients had a positive response to HUTT. Syncope was observed in another 44 patients during either ISDN or ISOP period (14/58 [24.1%] and 30/54 [55.5%] with ISDN vs ISOP, respectively, P < .05). The time to symptoms was shorter with both ISDN and ISOP compared with passive period (6.5 +/- 2.9, 6.3 +/- 5.9, and 10.3 +/- 4.4, minutes, respectively, P < .05). The severity score for cardioinhibition response was significantly higher with ISDN compared with the passive period and ISOP (2 +/- 0.8, 1.25 +/- 0.45, and 1.26 +/- 0.45, respectively, P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Sublingual ISDN is less sensitive and less safe compared to intravenous ISOP in assessing pediatric age patients with suspected neurocardiogenic syncope and with a negative result in tilt test without provocation. The simplicity of ISDN use should be weighed against the risk of longer symptoms with ISDN.
BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the diagnostic value and safety of sublingual isosorbid dinitrate (ISDN) with intravenous isoproterenol (ISOP) during head-up tilt table testing (HUTT) in pediatric patients with suspected neurocardiogenic syncope. METHODS: One hundred thirty-six consecutive pediatric patients complaining of presyncope or syncope were submitted to HUTT for the first time. Those who did not develop syncope or presyncope during passive HUTT for 20 minutes underwent repeated HUTT with either 1.25 to 2.5 mg sublingual ISDN or intravenous ISOP (1-3 mug/min) for 20 minutes. There were 54 boys and 82 girls, aged 10 to 18 years with an average of 15.5 +/- 2.4 years and a median of 16 years. Among the patients with cardioinhibition or mixed responses, the severity of the bradyarrhythmia was scored 1 to 3 (restoration of effective rhythm within 10 seconds, 10-20 seconds, and >20 seconds while back to supine position, respectively). RESULTS: During the passive period, 24 (17.6%) of 136 patients had a positive response to HUTT. Syncope was observed in another 44 patients during either ISDN or ISOP period (14/58 [24.1%] and 30/54 [55.5%] with ISDN vs ISOP, respectively, P < .05). The time to symptoms was shorter with both ISDN and ISOP compared with passive period (6.5 +/- 2.9, 6.3 +/- 5.9, and 10.3 +/- 4.4, minutes, respectively, P < .05). The severity score for cardioinhibition response was significantly higher with ISDN compared with the passive period and ISOP (2 +/- 0.8, 1.25 +/- 0.45, and 1.26 +/- 0.45, respectively, P < .01). CONCLUSIONS: Sublingual ISDN is less sensitive and less safe compared to intravenous ISOP in assessing pediatric age patients with suspected neurocardiogenic syncope and with a negative result in tilt test without provocation. The simplicity of ISDN use should be weighed against the risk of longer symptoms with ISDN.