Cited by 89Cardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic DisordersCardiac pacing and defibrillation studiesHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control

Less syncope and milder symptoms in patients treated with pacing for induced cardioinhibitory carotid sinus syndrome: a randomized study

Open access
Claesson, J.-E., Kristensson, B.-E., Edvardsson, N., Wahrborg, P.·2007·Europace

Abstract

AIMS: The aim of this study was to examine the effect on symptoms in patients with induced cardioinhibitory carotid sinus syndrome (ICSS) when treated or not treated with a pacemaker. METHODS AND RESULTS: Sixty patients with a history of syncope or pre-syncope and ICSS were randomized to receive a permanent pacemaker (P group, n = 30) or no pacing (NP group, n = 30). ICSS was defined as a ventricular pause (i.e. asystole) lasting 3 s or more in response to carotid sinus stimulation. The patients were seen at 3 and 12 months and at symptoms. At 12 months, the rate of syncope in the NP group was 40% (n = 12) compared with 10% (n = 3) in the P group (P = 0.008). The majority (11 of 12) of the syncope recurrences in the NP group occurred during the first 3 months. Pre-syncope occurred in two patients (7%) in the NP group and in eight (27%) in the P group. Ten patients (33%) with recurrent syncope in the NP group later crossed-over to receive pacemaker implant. CONCLUSIONS: A history of syncope or pre-syncope, plus ICSS, was a strong predictor of subsequent syncope or pre-syncope. Most of the new symptoms occurred within 3 months. Pacemaker treatment effectively reduced syncope and/or resulted in milder symptoms.

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 · 10.1093/europace/eum180

Cites

36 of 36 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?

  • The diagnosis of carotid sinus syndrome requires both the reproduction of spontaneous symptoms during carotid sinus massage and clinical features of spontaneous syncope compatible with a reflex mechanism.

    “There is strong consensus that the diagnosis of CSS requires both the reproduction of spontaneous symptoms during CSM and clinical features of spontaneous syncope compatible with a reflex mechanism.”

    From 2018 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of syncope (2018) · cites this paper as [99]

    The Definitions section says cardioinhibitory carotid sinus syndrome may be diagnosed even when a close relationship between carotid-sinus manipulation and syncope has not been demonstrated. That contradicts the claim that reproducing spontaneous symptoms during massage is required. The Introduction also notes continuing controversy rather than strong consensus. Page numbers are unavailable in our copy. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Checked by a reasoning model — may be wrong.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured
  • Two randomized trials confirmed fewer recurrences at follow-up in paced patients than in those without pacing.

    “These results were confirmed in two randomized trials. 98,99”

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. Brignole M, Gigli G, Altomonte F. The cardioinhibitory reflex evoked by carotid sinus stimulation in normal and in pationets with cardiovascular disorders. G Ital Cardiol 1985;15:514-9.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Claesson, J.-E., Kristensson, B.-E., Edvardsson, N., & Wahrborg, P.
Affiliations
  • University of Skövde (SE)
  • Sahlgrenska University Hospital (SE)
Corresponding author
Claesson, J.-E.
Venue
Europace
Published
2007-06-08
Volume
9
Issue
10
Pages
932-936
ISSN
  • 1099-5129 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-2092
OpenAlex
W2115815539
Cited by
89
References
36
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 4 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 4 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 12 · 2013: 8 · 2012: 2
FWCI
3.65
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • EP Europace (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
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
permanent pacemaker, syncope, presyncope, carotid sinus stimulation, ventricular pause, syncope recurrence, symptom severity
MeSH terms
Aged, Cardiac Pacing, Artificial, Cardiovascular Agents, Carotid Sinus, Female, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Pacemaker, Artificial, Recurrence, Regression Analysis, Syncope, Syndrome, Treatment Outcome, Tilt-Table Test

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