CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 151Cardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic DisordersCardiac pacing and defibrillation studiesHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 48 of the 50 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

The Expectation Effect and Cardiac Pacing for Refractory Vasovagal Syncope

Sud, Sachin, Massel, David, Klein, George J., Leong-Sit, Peter, Yee, Raymond, Skanes, Allan C., Gula, Lorne J., Krahn, Andrew D.·2007·The American Journal of Medicine
DOI 10.1016/j.amjmed.2006.05.046
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Background Clinical trials of pacing for vasovagal syncope have shown conflicting results. We performed a meta-analysis to determine whether permanent pacemaker therapy prevents refractory vasovagal syncope.Methods Randomized trials comparing pacemaker therapy with medical therapy, usual care, placebo, or different pacing algorithms in the prevention of recurrent vasovagal syncope were considered. The primary endpoint was first recurrence of syncope.Results Nine randomized trials (2 double blind, 7 open label or single blind) were included. There was significant heterogeneity when all 9 trials were pooled (P=.0009 and I(2)=69.6%), reflecting methodological diversity in blinding and the nature of the control therapy. When pooled by trial methodology, heterogeneity was no longer apparent. Permanent pacing reduced the risk of recurrent syncope in unblinded studies (odds ratio [OR] 0.09, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.04 to 0.22) and in studies comparing pacemaker algorithms (OR 0.04, 95% CI, 0.0 to 0.23). No effect was seen in double-blinded trials (OR 0.83, 95% CI, 0.41 to 1.70). Awareness that a permanent pacemaker was implanted and functional was associated with a significant 'expectation' effect, which itself reduced the risk of recurrent syncope (OR 0.16, 95% CI, 0.06 to 0.40, P=.0001). Results were similar when restricted to patients with a marked cardioinhibitory response on baseline tilt table testing.Conclusion The results of small, preliminary trials have overestimated the treatment effect of pacemakers due to a lack of blinding of physicians and patients. Blinded trials suggest that the apparent response is due to a strong expectation response to pacing.

Overview

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.amjmed.2006.05.046

Cites

48 of 48 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Verification

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

Citations

Cites

Cited by

Sorted by citations

See all 151

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Sud, S., Massel, D., Klein, G. J., Leong-Sit, P., Yee, R., Skanes, A. C., Gula, L. J., & Krahn, A. D.
Affiliations
Western University (CA)
Corresponding author
Krahn, Andrew D.
ORCID
Venue
The American Journal of Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2007-01
Volume
120
Issue
1
Pages
54-62
ISSN
0002-9343 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.amjmed.2006.05.046
OpenAlex
W1987480715
Cited by
151
References
50
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 7 · 2021: 8 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 6 · 2017: 15 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 10 · 2013: 15 · 2012: 15
FWCI
1.57
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Licence
Locations
  • The American Journal of Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac pacing and defibrillation studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Keywords
vasovagal syncope, permanent pacemaker, cardiac pacing, expectancy effects, blinding, trial heterogeneity, syncope recurrence, cardioinhibitory response, tilt table test, pacing algorithms
MeSH terms
Cardiac Pacing, Artificial, Data Interpretation, Statistical, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pacemaker, Artificial, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Syncope, Vasovagal

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