Interventions aimed to increase average 24-h systolic blood pressure reduce blood pressure drops in patients with reflex syncope and orthostatic intolerance.

AIMS: Systolic blood pressure (SBP) drops recorded by 24-h ambulatory blood pressure (BP) monitoring (ABPM) identify patients with susceptibility to reflex syncope and orthostatic intolerance. We tested the hypothesis that treatments aimed to increase BP (reassurance, education, and lifestyle measures plus pharmacological strategies) can reduce SBP drops. METHODS AND RESULTS: This was a multicentre, observational proof-of-concept study performed in patients with reflex syncope and/or orthostatic intolerance and with SBP drops on a screening ABPM. Among 144 eligible patients, 111 underwent a second ABPM on average 2.5 months after start of treatment. Overall, mean 24-h SBP increased from 114.1 ± 12.1 to 121.4 ± 14.5 mmHg (P < 0.0001). The number of SBP drops <90 and <100 mmHg decreased by 61%, 46% during daytime, and by 48% and 37% during 24-h period, respectively (P < 0.0001 for all). The dose-response relationship between difference in 24-h average SBP increase and reduction in number of SBP drops reached a plateau around ∼15 mmHg increase of 24-h SBP. The reduction in SBP drop rate was consistent and significant in patients who underwent deprescription of hypotensive medications (n = 44) and in patients who received BP-rising drugs (n = 67). CONCLUSION: In patients with reflex syncope and/or orthostatic intolerance, an increase in average 24-h SBP, regardless of the implemented strategy, significantly reduced the number of SBP drops and symptom burden. A 13 mmHg increase in 24-h SBP appears to represent the optimal goal for aborting the maximal number of SBP drops, representing a possible target for future interventions. ClincalTrials.gov identifier: NCT05729724.

Digital consults to optimize guideline-directed therapy: design of a pragmatic multicenter randomized controlled trial.

AIMS: Many heart failure (HF) patients do not receive optimal guideline-directed medical therapy (GDMT) despite clear benefit on morbidity and mortality outcomes. Digital consults (DCs) have the potential to improve efficiency on GDMT optimization to serve the growing HF population. The investigator-initiated ADMINISTER trial was designed as a pragmatic multicenter randomized controlled open-label trial to evaluate efficacy and safety of DC in patients on HF treatment. METHODS AND RESULTS: Patients (n = 150) diagnosed with HF with a reduced ejection fraction will be randomized to DC or standard care (1:1). The intervention group receives multifaceted DCs including (i) digital data sharing (e.g. exchange of pharmacotherapy use and home-measured vital signs), (ii) patient education via an e-learning, and (iii) digital guideline recommendations to treating clinicians. The consults are performed remotely unless there is an indication to perform the consult physically. The primary outcome is the GDMT prescription rate score, and secondary outcomes include time till full GDMT optimization, patient and clinician satisfaction, time spent on healthcare, and Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire. Results will be reported in accordance to the CONSORT statement. CONCLUSIONS: The ADMINISTER trial will offer the first randomized controlled data on GDMT prescription rates, time till full GDMT optimization, time spent on healthcare, quality of life, and patient and clinician satisfaction of the multifaceted patient- and clinician-targeted DC for GDMT optimization.

A cross-sectional nationwide survey of guideline based syncope units in the Netherlands: the SU-19 score-a novel validation for best practices.

AIMS: We aimed to identify all syncope units (SUs) in the Netherlands and assess the extent to which these SUs fulfil the essential requirements outlined by the consensus statements of the European Heart Rhythm Association and the European Society of Cardiology syncope guidelines. For this, we developed the SU-19 score, a novel guideline based validation tool for best practice. METHODS AND RESULTS: All outpatient clinics of cardiology, neurology, and internal medicine in the Netherlands were screened for presence of any form of structured specialized syncope care. If present, these were included as SUs and requested to complete a questionnaire regarding syncope care. We assessed all SUs using the SU-19 score regarding structure (3 points), available tests (12 points), and initial evaluation (4 points). Twenty SUs were identified in the Netherlands, both academic (5/20) and non-academic hospitals (15/20), 17/20 reported multidisciplinary involvement during initial evaluation. In 19/20, neurology, cardiology, or both were responsible for the syncope management. Non-physicians were involved performing the head-up tilt test (44%) and initial evaluation (40%). The mean SU-19 score was 18.0 ± 1.1, 45% achieved the maximum score of 19 points. Variations were observed in protocols for active standing test, carotid sinus massage, and head-up tilt test. CONCLUSION: There is a network of 20 SUs in the Netherlands. Forty-five per cent fully met the SU-19 score (mean 18.0 ± 1.1). Slight variety existed in protocols for autonomic function tests. Neurology and cardiology were mostly involved in syncope management. Non-physicians play an important role in syncope care.