These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Characteristics and influence of different clinical forms on the development and prognosis of carotid sinus syndrome. Apropos of 215 cases].
    Author: Graux P, Carlioz R, Guyomar Y, Lemaire N, Rihani R, Cornaert P, Dutoit A, Croccel L.
    Journal: Arch Mal Coeur Vaiss; 1995 Jul; 88(7):999-1006. PubMed ID: 7487332.
    Abstract:
    The carotid sinus syndrome is a well-known cause of syncope: the cardio-inhibitory forms are the easiest to diagnose and probably the easiest to treat. However, the vasodepressive forms are as common but their outcome is mainly unknown. Eight hundred and fifty-three patients underwent endocavitary electrophysiological studies with invasive blood pressure measurement for unexplained syncope between October 1984 and January 1990. A carotid sinus syndrome was diagnosed in 215 cases. Fifty-two patients (24.2%) had a cardio-inhibitory form (ventricular standstill > or = 3 s during carotid sinus massage), 40 (18.6%) had a pure vasodepressive form (isolated fall of systolic blood pressure > 50 mmHg during massage) and 123 patients (57.2%) had a mixed form. The average age was 74.1 +/- 9.7 years with no difference between the different forms. A number of parameters was different on the cardio-inhibitory and vasodepressive forms: the number of men (75.6 vas 24.4%; p < 0.05) and the number of syncopes (83.3 vs 60%; p < 0.02) were greater in the cardio-inhibitory form; the vasodepressive forms were more often associated with a history of transient ischaemic attacks (15 vs 0%), a poor cardiovascular status (hypertension: 47.5 vs 15.7%; p < 0.01), coronary artery disease (47.5 vs 25.5%; p < 0.05), cardiac failure (27.5 vs 11.7%; p < 0.05), induction of sustained supraventricular tachycardia (50 vs 23.5%; p < 0.05) and a greater pacemaker effect (53.6 vs 34.8 mmHg; p < 0.01); of the 191 patients (84.9% of the population) followed up for an average of 21.2 months, 168 received treatment: implantation of a cardiac pacemaker in 108 patients, reduction of antihypertensive and/or potentially bradycardia-inducing drugs in 30 patients, prescription of antiarrhythmic therapy, in 30 patients.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]