Cited by 28Cardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic DisordersCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmiasCardiac Arrhythmias and Treatments

Flecainide Versus Procainamide in Electrophysiological Study in Patients With Syncope and Wide QRS Duration

Open access
Roca-Luque, Ivo, Francisco-Pasqual, Jaume, Oristrell, Gerard, Rodríguez-García, Julián, Santos-Ortega, Alba, Martin-Sanchez, Gabriel, Rivas-Gandara, Nuria, Perez-Rodon, Jordi +3 more·2019·JACC: Clinical Electrophysiology

Abstract

Objectives This study sought to compare the differences between procainamide and flecainide to stress the His-Purkinje system during electrophysiological study (EPS) in patients with syncope and bundle branch block (BBB).Background Patients with syncope and BBB are at risk of developing atrioventricular block. EPS is recommended including class I drug challenge to unmask His-Purkinje disease in cases with baseline normal His-ventricular interval. There is little data on differences between different class I drugs.Methods This was a prospective study of all consecutive patients undergoing EPS for syncope and BBB at a single center (January 1, 2012 to June 30, 2017). Of those patients with negative baseline EPS, 2 cohorts were compared: group A (historical cohort: procainamide) and group B (flecainide).Results During the study, 271 patients (age 73.9 ± 12.1 years, 64.9% male, QRS duration: 139.4 ± 13.9 ms) underwent EPS. In 166, baseline EPS was negative and class I drug challenge was performed (90 procainamide, 76 flecainide). The final value and percentage increase in the His-ventricular interval (76 ± 16 ms vs. 64 ± 10 ms and 22.5 ± 6.2% vs. 11.8 ± 5.3%; p < 0.001) and diagnostic yield (14.5% vs. 7.8%, p = 0.04) were higher with flecainide. No differences were found in baseline characteristics. During follow-up (25.8 ± 6.3 months), 39 patients (24.8%) with negative EPS (19.2% with flecainide vs. 30.1% with procainamide: relative risk: 5.1; 95% confidence interval: 2.6 to 10.2; p < 0. 001) received a pacemaker.Conclusions Flecainide has a higher diagnostic yield than does procainamide in patients with BBB, syncope, and negative baseline EPS due to a greater increase of the His-ventricular interval. Additionally, there is a lesser need for pacemaker implantation in patients in whom the class I drug test using flecainide was negative.

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.jacep.2018.09.015

Cites

27 of 27 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?

  • Flecainide is often utilized as a drug challenge during electrophysiological studies to reveal His-Purkinje disease in cases with a wide QRS complex, syncope, and a normal HV interval, as evidenced by a drug-induced increase in the HV interval to more than 100 ms.

    “Specifically, flecainide is often utilized as a drug challenge during electrophysiological studies to reveal His‐Purkinje disease in cases with a wide QRS complex, syncope, and a normal HV interval, as evidenced by a drug‐induced increase in the HV interval to more than 100 ms [22].”

    From Clinical Significance and Management of Atrioventricular Block Associated With Bradycardic/Antiarrhythmic Drug Therapy: Drug-Induced or Drug-Revealed? (2025) · cites this paper as [22]

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

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
Roca-Luque, I., Francisco-Pasqual, J., Oristrell, G., Rodríguez-García, J., Santos-Ortega, A., Martin-Sanchez, G., Rivas-Gandara, N., Perez-Rodon, J., Ferreira-Gonzalez, I., García-Dorado, D., & Moya-Mitjans, A.
Affiliations
Vall d'Hebron Hospital Universitari (ES)
Venue
JACC: Clinical Electrophysiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-02
Volume
5
Issue
2
Pages
212-219
ISSN
2405-500X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2902407339
Cited by
28
References
27
Citations by year
2025: 4 · 2024: 6 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1
FWCI
2.60
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • JACC. Clinical electrophysiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • European Regional Development Fund
  • Instituto de Salud Carlos III
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Cardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic Disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac Arrhythmias and Treatments
Keywords
flecainide, procainamide, syncope, bundle branch block, His-Purkinje system, His-ventricular interval, class I antiarrhythmic drugs, drug challenge, atrioventricular block, pacemaker implantation, diagnostic yield, electrophysiological study, ventricular conduction block, atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia, atrioventricular reentrant tachycardia
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Bundle-Branch Block, Electrocardiography, Female, Flecainide, Heart Conduction System, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Procainamide, Syncope, Electrophysiologic Techniques, Cardiac

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