TY - JOUR
T1 - Prediction of Pacemaker Requirement in Patients With Unexplained Syncope
T2 - The DROP Score
AU - Xiao, Xiaoman
AU - William, Jeremy
AU - Kistler, Peter M.
AU - Joseph, Stephen
AU - Patel, Hitesh C.
AU - Vaddadi, Gautam
AU - Kalman, Jonathan M.
AU - Mariani, Justin A.
AU - Voskoboinik, Aleksandr
N1 - Funding Information:
No relevant conflicts of interest identified. Aleksandr Voskoboinik is supported by an NHMRC EL1 Investigator Grant and NHF Early Career Fellowship.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2022 Australian and New Zealand Society of Cardiac and Thoracic Surgeons (ANZSCTS) and the Cardiac Society of Australia and New Zealand (CSANZ)
PY - 2022/7
Y1 - 2022/7
N2 - Background: Implantable loop recorders (ILR) are increasingly utilised in the evaluation of unexplained syncope. However, they are expensive and do not protect against future syncope. Objectives: To compare patients requiring permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation during ILR follow-up with those without abnormalities detected on ILR in order to identify potential predictors of benefit from upfront pacing. Methods: We analysed 100 consecutive patients receiving ILR: Group 1 (n=50) underwent PPM insertion due to bradyarrhythmias detected on ILR; Group 2 (n=50) had no arrhythmias detected on ILR over >3 years follow-up. Baseline clinical characteristics, syncope history, electrocardiographic and echocardiographic parameters were assessed to identify predictors of ultimate requirement for pacing. Results: Group 1 (64% male, median age 70.8 years; IQR 65.5–78.8) were older than Group 2 (58% male, median 60.2 years; IQR 44.0–73.0 p=0.001) and were less likely to have related historical factors such as overheating, posture and exercise (98% vs 70% p<0.001). PR interval was also longer in Group 1 (192±51 vs 169±23 p=0.006) with greater prevalence of distal conduction system disease (30% vs 4.3% p=0.002). Significant univariate predictors for PPM insertion were distal conduction disease (p=0.007), first degree atrioventricular (AV) block (p=0.003), absence of precipitating factors (p=0.004), and age >65 years (p=0.001). Injury sustained, recurrent syncope, history of atrial fibrillation (AF) or heart failure, left atrial (LA) size and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) were not predictive. These significant predictors were incorporated into the DROP score1 (0–4). Using time-to-event analysis, no patients with a score of 0 progressed to pacing, while higher scores (3–4) strongly predicted pacing requirement (log-rank p<0.001). Conclusion: The DROP score may be helpful in identifying patients likely to benefit from upfront permanent pacemaker (PPM) insertion following unexplained syncope. Larger prospective studies are required to validate this tool.
AB - Background: Implantable loop recorders (ILR) are increasingly utilised in the evaluation of unexplained syncope. However, they are expensive and do not protect against future syncope. Objectives: To compare patients requiring permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation during ILR follow-up with those without abnormalities detected on ILR in order to identify potential predictors of benefit from upfront pacing. Methods: We analysed 100 consecutive patients receiving ILR: Group 1 (n=50) underwent PPM insertion due to bradyarrhythmias detected on ILR; Group 2 (n=50) had no arrhythmias detected on ILR over >3 years follow-up. Baseline clinical characteristics, syncope history, electrocardiographic and echocardiographic parameters were assessed to identify predictors of ultimate requirement for pacing. Results: Group 1 (64% male, median age 70.8 years; IQR 65.5–78.8) were older than Group 2 (58% male, median 60.2 years; IQR 44.0–73.0 p=0.001) and were less likely to have related historical factors such as overheating, posture and exercise (98% vs 70% p<0.001). PR interval was also longer in Group 1 (192±51 vs 169±23 p=0.006) with greater prevalence of distal conduction system disease (30% vs 4.3% p=0.002). Significant univariate predictors for PPM insertion were distal conduction disease (p=0.007), first degree atrioventricular (AV) block (p=0.003), absence of precipitating factors (p=0.004), and age >65 years (p=0.001). Injury sustained, recurrent syncope, history of atrial fibrillation (AF) or heart failure, left atrial (LA) size and left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF) were not predictive. These significant predictors were incorporated into the DROP score1 (0–4). Using time-to-event analysis, no patients with a score of 0 progressed to pacing, while higher scores (3–4) strongly predicted pacing requirement (log-rank p<0.001). Conclusion: The DROP score may be helpful in identifying patients likely to benefit from upfront permanent pacemaker (PPM) insertion following unexplained syncope. Larger prospective studies are required to validate this tool.
KW - Bundle branch block
KW - Diagnosis
KW - Distal conduction disease
KW - Implantable loop recorder
KW - Pacemaker
KW - Syncope
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85127350743&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.hlc.2022.03.002
DO - 10.1016/j.hlc.2022.03.002
M3 - Article
C2 - 35370087
AN - SCOPUS:85127350743
SN - 1443-9506
VL - 31
SP - 999
EP - 1005
JO - Heart Lung and Circulation
JF - Heart Lung and Circulation
IS - 7
ER -