Cited by 323Cardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic DisordersCardiac pacing and defibrillation studiesHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control

A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of permanent cardiac pacing for the treatment of recurrent tilt-induced vasovagal syncope. The vasovagal syncope and pacing trial (SYNPACE)

Open access
RAVIELE, A, GIADA, F, MENOZZI, C, SPECA, G, ORAZI, S, GASPARINI, G, SUTTON, R, BRIGNOLE, M·2004·European Heart Journal

Abstract

AIMS: Recently, some studies revealed the efficacy of pacemaker implantation in decreasing recurrences in patients with vasovagal syncope. As these studies were not blinded or placebo-controlled, the benefits observed might have been due to a bias in the assessment of outcomes or to a placebo effect of the pacemaker. We performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study in order to ascertain if pacing therapy reduces the risk of syncope relapse. METHODS AND RESULTS: Twenty-nine patients (53 +/- 16 years; 19 women) with severe recurrent tilt-induced vasovagal syncope (median 12 syncopes in the lifetime) and 1 syncopal relapse after head-up tilt testing underwent implantation of a pacemaker, and were randomized to pacemaker ON or to pacemaker OFF. During a median of 715 days of follow-up, 8 (50%) patients randomized to pacemaker ON had recurrence of syncope compared to 5 (38%) of patients randomized to pacemaker OFF (p = n.s.); the median time to first syncope was longer in the pacemaker ON than in pacemaker OFF group, although not significantly so (97 [38-144] vs 20 [4-302] days; p = 0.38). There was also no significant difference in the subgroups of patients who had had a mixed response and in those who had had an asystolic response during head-up tilt testing. CONCLUSION: Our data were unable to show a superiority of active pacing versus inactive pacing in preventing syncopal recurrence in patients with severe recurrent tilt-induced vasovagal syncope.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ehj.2004.06.031

Cites

28 of 28 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Earlier observational, open-label, and single-blind pacing studies were uniformly positive, but two subsequent double-blind studies in adults were negative.

    “Although earlier observational, open-label, and single-blind studies have been uniformly positive, the results of 2 subsequent double-blind studies in adults were negative.133–138”

    From 2015 Heart Rhythm Society Expert Consensus Statement on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Postural Tachycardia Syndrome, Inappropriate Sinus Tachycardia, and Vasovagal Syncope (2015) · cites this paper as [137]

    The Comparison with previous studies section reports positive results for dual-chamber observational studies and three randomized open studies, and says that VPS II and SYNPACE did not confirm pacing efficacy. It also says observational studies found single-chamber VVI pacing ineffective, so the earlier studies were not uniformly positive; the passage does not establish the claim about single-blind studies. No page number is available in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In the VPS II and SYNPACE trials, active pacing did not reduce syncope in patients with recurrent vasovagal syncope.

    “In this study, and in the similarly designed SYNPACE trial, no reduction in syncope was seen [30] .”

    From Evaluating and managing bradycardia (2020) · cites this paper as [30]

  • Pacing was ineffective in trials that enrolled patients without an asystolic tilt response.

    “In general, pacing was ineffective in trials that enrolled patients without an asystolic tilt response. 299,300”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. [19]19. Sheldon RS, Rose S, Flanagan P et al. Multivariate predictors of syncope recurrence in drug-free patients following a positive tilt table test. Circulation 1996;93:973-81.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
RAVIELE, A., GIADA, F., MENOZZI, C., SPECA, G., ORAZI, S., GASPARINI, G., SUTTON, R., & BRIGNOLE, M.
Affiliations
  • Santa Maria Nuova Hospital (IT)
  • Royal Brompton Hospital (GB)
Corresponding author
RAVIELE, A
Venue
European Heart Journal
Published
2004-10
Volume
25
Issue
19
Pages
1741-1748
ISSN
0195-668X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1982517883
Cited by
323
References
28
Citations by year
2026: 7 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 17 · 2020: 15 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 12 · 2017: 23 · 2016: 16 · 2015: 12 · 2014: 23 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 17
FWCI
17.37
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • European Heart Journal (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • INFM-OAR (INFN Catania) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Zenodo (CERN European Organization for Nuclear Research) (other-oa)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › 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 cardiac pacing, pacemaker implantation, syncope recurrence, head-up tilt
MeSH terms
Cardiac Pacing, Artificial, Double-Blind Method, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pacemaker, Artificial, Prospective Studies, Treatment Outcome, Tilt-Table Test, Syncope, Vasovagal, Secondary Prevention

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