The management of patients with carotid sinus syndrome: is pacing the answer?
Abstract
Carotid sinus syndrome (CSS) is an under recognized cause of recurrent unexplained syncope and potentially of recurrent falls in the elderly. The mechanisms that lead to syncope in patients with CSS remain debated. However, evidence for both peripheral and central alterations have been recently reported. The diagnosis of CSS is challenging and a high clinical suspicion is usually needed to make the diagnosis. Clinical presentation may be typical and characterized by a clear association between accidental manipulation of the carotid sinus and the presentation of syncope. On the other hand, recurrent unexplained syncope and unexplained falls may be the clinical presentation of patients with CSS without a specific trigger. Carotid sinus hypersensitivity documented by carotid sinus massage (CSM) may be the only finding indicating the possibility of CSS as the cause of syncope. In older patients with recurrent unexplained syncope and a negative diagnostic work-up, carotid sinus massage both in the supine and upright positions is recommended. CSS may present primarily as a cardioinhibitory response or a true vasodepressor response. Therapy should address any underlying pathology if present, and be directed to either prevent cardioinhibition, vasodepression or both alterations. A variety of medical therapies have been used with unclear effects. No appropriately designed controlled clinical trials have been performed comparing pacing with medical therapy. Nonetheless, available infor…
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Carotid sinus syndrome is due to an abnormal reflex attributed to baroreceptor and possibly medulla dysfunction.
“It occurs more commonly in men >40 years of age (413,414) and is due to an abnormal reflex attributed to baroreceptor and possibly medulla dysfunction (415,416).”
From 2017 ACC/AHA/HRS Guideline for the Evaluation and Management of Patients With Syncope (2017) · cites this paper as [415]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 54 · Cited by 42
- Authors
- Healey, J., Connolly, S. J., & Morillo, C. A.
- Affiliations
- Population Health Research Institute (CA)
- Venue
- Clinical Autonomic Research
- Published
- 2004-10
- Volume
- 14
- Issue
- S1
- Pages
- i80-i86
- ISSN
- 0959-9851 (ISSN-L)
- 1619-1560
- OpenAlex
- W2093824782
- Cited by
- 42
- References
- 54
- Citations by year
- 2026: 1 · 2025: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 5 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 2
- FWCI
- 0.26
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Licence
- www.springer.com/tdm (tdm)
- Locations
- Clinical Autonomic Research (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Cardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic Disorders
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Cerebrovascular and Carotid Artery Diseases
- Keywords
- carotid sinus syndrome, syncope, carotid sinus hypersensitivity, carotid sinus massage, cardiac pacing, cardioinhibition, vasodepression, falls in older adults, pathophysiology, diagnosis, medical therapy
- MeSH terms
- Cardiac Pacing, Artificial, Carotid Sinus, Humans, Syncope, Syndrome
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review