Cookies on this website

We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you click 'Accept all cookies' we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies and you won't see this message again. If you click 'Reject all non-essential cookies' only necessary cookies providing core functionality such as security, network management, and accessibility will be enabled. Click 'Find out more' for information on how to change your cookie settings.

BACKGROUND: Neurocardiogenic syncope is a common condition with significant associated psychological and physical morbidity. The effectiveness of therapeutic options for neurocardiogenic syncope beyond placebo remains uncertain. METHODS: The primary endpoint was the risk ratio (RR) of spontaneously recurring syncope following any therapeutic intervention. We also examined the effect of blinding on treatment efficacy. We identified all randomised trials which evaluated the effect of any pharmacological, device-based or supportive intervention on patients with a history of syncope. A systematic search was conducted on Medline, Embase, PubMed databases and Cochrane Central Register for Controlled Trials from 1950 to 25 April 2023. Event rates, their RRs and 95% CIs were calculated, and a random-effects meta-analysis was conducted for each intervention. Data analysis was performed in R using RStudio. RESULTS: We identified 47 eligible trials randomising 3518 patients. Blinded trials assessing syncope recurrence were neutral for beta blockers, fludrocortisone and conventional dual-chamber pacing but were favourable for selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors (SSRIs) (RR 0.40, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.63, p<0.001), midodrine (RR 0.70, 95% CI 0.53 to 0.94, p=0.016) and closed-loop stimulation (CLS) pacing (RR 0.15, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.35, p<0.001). Unblinded trials reported significant benefits for all therapy categories other than beta blockers and consistently showed larger benefits than blinded trials. CONCLUSIONS: Under blinded conditions, SSRIs, midodrine and CLS pacing significantly reduced syncope recurrence. Future trials for syncope should be blinded to avoid overestimating treatment effects. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022330148.

Original publication

DOI

10.1136/openhrt-2024-002669

Type

Journal article

Journal

Open Heart

Publication Date

18/06/2024

Volume

11

Keywords

Meta-Analysis, Pacemaker, Artificial, Quality of Health Care, SYNCOPE, Humans, Syncope, Vasovagal, Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic, Treatment Outcome, Recurrence