Morillo, Carlos A.

Abstract Cardioneuroablation has emerged as a potential alternative to cardiac pacing in selected cases with vasovagal reflex syncope, extrinsic vagally induced sinus bradycardia-arrest or atrioventricular block. The technique was first introduced decades ago, and its use has risen over the past decade. However, as with any intervention, proper patient selection and technique are a prerequisite for a safe and effective use of cardioneuroablation therapy. This document aims to review and interpret available scientific evidence and provide a summary position on the topic.

AbstractThis international multidisciplinary document intends to provide clinicians with evidence‐based practical patient‐centered recommendations for evaluating patients and decedents with (aborted) sudden cardiac arrest and their families. The document includes a framework for the investigation of the family allowing steps to be taken, should an inherited condition be found, to minimize further events in affected relatives. Integral to the process is counseling of the patients and families, not only because of the emotionally charged subject, but because finding (or not finding) the cause of the arrest may influence management of family members. The formation of multidisciplinary teams is essential to provide a complete service to the patients and their families, and the varied expertise of the writing committee was formulated to reflect this need. The document sections were divided up and drafted by the writing committee members according to their expertise. The recommendations represent the consensus opinion of the entire writing committee, graded by Class of Recommendation and Level of Evidence. The recommendations were opened for public comment and reviewed by the relevant scientific and clinical document committees of the Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS) and the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS); the document underwent external review and endorsement by the partner and collaborating societies. While the recommendations are for optimal care, it is recognized that not all resources will be available to all clinicians. Nevertheless, this document articulates the evaluation that the clinician should aspire to provide for patients with sudden cardiac arrest, decedents with sudden unexplained death, and their families.

We evaluated a method of baroreflex testing involving sequential intravenous bolus injections of nitroprusside followed by phenylephrine and phenylephrine followed by nitroprusside in 18 healthy men and women, and we drew inferences regarding human sympathetic and vagal baroreflex mechanisms. We recorded the electrocardiogram, photoplethysmographic finger arterial pressure, and peroneal nerve muscle sympathetic activity. We then contrasted least squares linear regression slopes derived from the depressor (nitroprusside) and pressor (phenylephrine) phases with 1) slopes derived from spontaneous fluctuations of systolic arterial pressures and R-R intervals, and 2) baroreflex gain derived from cross-spectral analyses of systolic pressures and R-R intervals. We calculated sympathetic baroreflex gain from integrated muscle sympathetic nerve activity and diastolic pressures. We found that vagal baroreflex slopes are less when arterial pressures are falling than when they are rising and that this hysteresis exists over pressure ranges both below and above baseline levels. Although pharmacological and spontaneous vagal baroreflex responses correlate closely, pharmacological baroreflex slopes tend to be lower than those derived from spontaneous fluctuations. Sympathetic baroreflex slopes are similar when arterial pressure is falling and rising; however, small pressure elevations above baseline silence sympathetic motoneurons. Vagal, but not sympathetic baroreflex gains vary inversely with subjects’ ages and their baseline arterial pressures. There is no correlation between sympathetic and vagal baroreflex gains. We recommend repeated sequential nitroprusside followed by phenylephrine doses as a simple, efficientmeans to provoke and characterize human vagal and sympathetic baroreflex responses.

Abstract— We evaluated whether droxidopa, a prodrug converted to norepinephrine, is beneficial in the treatment of symptomatic neurogenic orthostatic hypotension, which results from failure to generate an appropriate norepinephrine response to postural challenge. Patients with symptomatic neurogenic orthostatic hypotension and Parkinson disease, multiple system atrophy, pure autonomic failure, or nondiabetic autonomic neuropathy underwent open-label droxidopa titration (100–600 mg, 3× daily). Responders then received an additional 7-day open-label treatment at their individualized dose. Patients were subsequently randomized to continue with droxidopa or withdraw to placebo for 14 days. We then assessed patient-reported scores on the Orthostatic Hypotension Questionnaire and blood pressure measurements. Mean worsening of Orthostatic Hypotension Questionnaire dizziness/lightheadedness score from randomization to end of study (the primary outcome; N=101) was 1.9±3.2 with placebo and 1.3±2.8 units with droxidopa ( P =0.509). Four of the other 5 Orthostatic Hypotension Questionnaire symptom scores and all 4 symptom-impact scores favored droxidopa, with statistical significance for the patient’s self-reported ability to perform activities requiring standing a short time ( P =0.033) and standing a long time ( P =0.028). Furthermore, a post hoc analysis of a predefined composite score of all symptoms (Orthostatic Hypotension Questionnaire composite) demonstrated a significant benefit for droxidopa ( P =0.013). There was no significant difference between groups for standing systolic blood pressure ( P =0.680). Droxidopa was well tolerated. In summary, this randomized withdrawal droxidopa study failed to meet its primary efficacy end point. Additional clinical trials are needed to confirm that droxidopa is beneficial in symptomatic neurogenic orthostatic hypotension, as suggested by the positive secondary outcomes of this trial. Clinical Trial Registration— URL: http://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT00633880.