Cited by 49Cardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic DisordersCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmiasCardiac Arrhythmias and Treatments

Significance of inducible ventricular fibrillation in patients with coronary artery disease and unexplained syncope

Open access
Mittal, Suneet, Hao, Steven C, Iwai, Sei, Stein, Kenneth M, Markowitz, Steven M, Slotwiner, David J, Lerman, Bruce B·2001·Journal of the American College of Cardiology

Abstract

Objectives This study was designed to determine the incidence and prognostic significance of inducible ventricular fibrillation (VF) in patients with coronary artery disease (CAD) and unexplained syncope.Background Current American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association practice guidelines recommend implantation of internal cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) in patients with unexplained syncope in whom either ventricular tachycardia (VT) or VF is inducible during electrophysiologic (EP) testing. Although the prognostic significance of inducible monomorphic VT is known, the significance of inducible VF remains undefined.Methods We evaluated 118 consecutive patients with CAD and unexplained syncope who underwent EP testing. Sustained monomorphic VT was inducible in 53 (45%) patients; in 20 (17%) patients, VF was the only inducible arrhythmia; and no sustained ventricular arrhythmia was inducible in the remaining 45 (38%) patients. The latter two groups of 65 (55%) patients make up the study population.Results There were 16 deaths among the study population during a follow-up period of 25.3 +/- 19.6 months. The overall one- and two-year survival in these patients was 89% and 81%, respectively. No significant difference in survival was observed between patients with and without inducible VF (80% power to detect a fourfold survival difference).Conclusions In 17% of patients with CAD and unexplained syncope, VF is the only inducible ventricular arrhythmia. Within the limits of this pilot study, long-term follow-up of patients with and without inducible VF demonstrates no difference in survival between the two groups. Therefore, the practice of ICD implantation in patients with CAD, unexplained syncope and inducible VF, especially with triple ventricular extrastimuli, may merit reconsideration.

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/s0735-1097(01)01379-1

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 patients with a previous myocardial infarction and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), induction of sustained monomorphic VT is strongly predictive of the cause of syncope, whereas the induction of ventricular fibrillation (VF) is considered a non-specific finding.

    “In patients with a previous myocardial infarction and preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), induction of sustained monomorphic VT is strongly predictive of the cause of syncope, 218 whereas the induction of ventricular fibrillation (VF) is considered a non-specific finding. 37”

    From 2018 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of syncope (2018) · cites this paper as [37]

    Split into 2 atoms — 0 confirmed, 2 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

Research works printed but not linked: 1

  1. Mittal S, Stephenson K, Stein KM, et al. Long-term outcome of patients with a non-ischemic cardiomyopathy and unexplained syn- cope. Pacing Clin Electrophysiol 2000;23:560.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mittal, S., Hao, S. C., Iwai, S., Stein, K. M., Markowitz, S. M., Slotwiner, D. J., & Lerman, B. B.
Corresponding author
Lerman, Bruce B
Venue
Journal of the American College of Cardiology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2001-08
Volume
38
Issue
2
Pages
371-376
ISSN
0735-1097 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2126281279
Cited by
49
References
30
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 1 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 7
FWCI
2.31
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of the American College of Cardiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • American Heart Association
  • National Institutes of Health
  • National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute (R01HL056139, R01HL56139)
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
coronary artery disease, unexplained syncope, implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, ICD implantation, electrophysiologic testing, monomorphic ventricular tachycardia, survival, prognosis, ventricular arrhythmias
MeSH terms
Aged, Coronary Disease, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pacemaker, Artificial, Pilot Projects, Prognosis, Syncope, Ventricular Fibrillation, Incidence, Survival Rate, Defibrillators, Implantable, 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