Cited by 315Cardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic DisordersVestibular and auditory disordersHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control

Effectiveness of Physical Counterpressure Maneuvers in Preventing Vasovagal Syncope

Open access
van Dijk, Nynke, Quartieri, Fabio, Blanc, Jean-Jaques, Garcia-Civera, Roberto, Brignole, Michele, Moya, Angel, Wieling, Wouter·2006·Journal of the American College of Cardiology

Abstract

Objectives In this study, we assessed the effectiveness of physical counterpressure maneuvers (PCM) in daily life.Background There is presently no evidence-based therapy for vasovagal syncope. Current treatment consists of explanation and life-style advice. Physical counterpressure maneuvers have been shown to raise blood pressure and to control or abort vasovagal episodes in laboratory conditions.Methods We performed a multicenter, prospective, randomized clinical trial, which included 223 patients age 38.6 (+/-15.4) years with recurrent vasovagal syncope and recognizable prodromal symptoms. One hundred and seventeen patients were randomized to standardized conventional therapy alone, and 106 patients received conventional therapy plus training in PCM.Results The median yearly syncope burden during follow-up was significantly lower in the group trained in PCM than in the control group (p = 0.004). During a mean follow-up period of 14 months, overall 50.9% of the patients with conventional treatment and 31.6% of the patients trained in PCM experienced a syncopal recurrence (p = 0.005). Actuarial recurrence-free survival was better in the treatment group (log-rank p = 0.018), resulting in a relative risk reduction of 39% (95% confidence interval, 11% to 53%). No adverse events were reported.Conclusions Physical counterpressure maneuvers are a risk-free, effective, and low-cost treatment method in patients with vasovagal syncope and recognizable prodromal symptoms, and should be advised as first-line treatment in patients presenting with vasovagal syncope with prodromal symptoms. (The PC-Trial; http://www.controlled-trials.com/isrctn/trial/45146526/0/45146526.html; ISRCTN45146526).

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.jacc.2006.06.059

Cites

30 of 30 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?

  • In that trial, syncope recurred in a substantial minority of patients, and the study was open label.

    “However, syncope recurred in a substantial minority of patients, and the study was open label.”

    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 [120]

    The Population section reports syncope recurrence in 31 of 98 patients (31.6%) in the maneuver group and 56 of 110 (50.9%) in the conventional-treatment group, supporting ‘a substantial minority.’ The Study limitations section says patients were blinded to the randomization outcome, while physicians were not; describing the study without qualification as open label overlooks that patient blinding. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In a randomized prospective parallel clinical trial, a physical counterpressure maneuver was superior to controls, with a relative risk reduction of 39%.

    “In a randomized, prospective parallel clinical trial, a physical counterpressure maneuver was superior to controls, with a relative risk reduction of 39%.120”

    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 [120]

    The Methods describe a prospective randomized trial, and the Results (Population section) report fewer syncopal recurrences with physical counterpressure maneuvers than with conventional therapy. However, that Results passage gives a relative risk reduction of 0.36 (36%), not the claimed 39%. (LLM, conf=0.86)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Tilt testing is widely accepted as a useful tool to demonstrate susceptibility of the patient to reflex syncope, especially a hypotensive (vasodepressive) tendency, and thereby to initiate treatment.

    “However, tilt testing is widely accepted as a useful tool to demonstrate susceptibility of the patient to reflex syncope, especially a hypotensive (vasodepressive) tendency, and thereby to initiate treatment (e.g. physical manoeuvres, see section 5). 119-121”

    From 2018 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of syncope (2018) · cites this paper as [121]

    The Study population section (page not provided) says tilt-table testing was used to confirm or establish a vasovagal syncope diagnosis, and that a positive response could include hypotension. It does not establish that tilt testing is widely accepted specifically to identify a vasodepressive tendency and thereby initiate treatment with physical manoeuvres. (LLM, conf=0.82)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • In the Physical Counterpressure Manoeuvres Trial, PCM training improved actuarial recurrence-free survival (log-rank P=0.018), resulting in a relative risk reduction of 39% (95% CI 11-53).

    “Actuarial recurrence-free survival was better in the PCM group (log-rank P =0.018), resulting in a relative risk reduction of 39% (95% CI 11-53).”

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

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
van Dijk, N., Quartieri, F., Blanc, J.-J., Garcia-Civera, R., Brignole, M., Moya, A., & Wieling, W.
Affiliations
  • Santa Maria Nuova Hospital (IT)
  • Presidio Ospedaliero (IT)
  • Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam (NL)
Venue
Journal of the American College of Cardiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2006-10
Volume
48
Issue
8
Pages
1652-1657
ISSN
0735-1097 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2165000248
Cited by
315
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 12 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 21 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 14 · 2018: 11 · 2017: 19 · 2016: 18 · 2015: 13 · 2014: 22 · 2013: 21 · 2012: 19
FWCI
16.66
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the American College of Cardiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Cardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic Disorders
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Vestibular and auditory disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Keywords
vasovagal syncope, syncope prevention, recurrent syncope, prodromal symptoms, recurrence-free survival, first-line therapy
MeSH terms
Actuarial Analysis, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Arm, Hand, Hemodynamics, Humans, Leg, Middle Aged, Motor Activity, Pressure, Survival Analysis, Treatment Outcome, 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