ArticleJournal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing2025
The Efficacy of Cardioneuroablation versus Midodrine in Patients with Vasovagal Syncope: Design and Rationale for the CAMPAIGN Trial.
Article in Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05803148 (Effect of Cardioneuroablation vs Midodrine on Syncope Recurrence Among Patients With Vasovagal Syncope), which is not on this map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Effect of Cardioneuroablation vs Midodrine on Syncope Recurrence Among Patients With Vasovagal Syncope: The CAMPAIGN Randomized Clinical Trial
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cardioneuroablation for Reflex Syncope and Functional Bradyarrhythmias: A State-of-the-Art Review.Journal of clinical medicine · 2026Review
- Comparing Physical, Pharmacological, Pacemaker, and Cardioneuroablation Therapies for Patients with Vasovagal Syncope: A systematic review and networkInternational journal of cardiology. Heart & vasculature · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundCurrent treatment strategies for vasovagal syncope (VVS) patients recommended by the guidelines are diverse, but effects of these therapies are still unsatisfactory with respective limitations on the indications. Cardioneuroablation (CNA), an innovative and promising therapy, has shown potently effective against syncopal recurrences in numerous observational studies. Recently, a single-center randomized clinical trial has reported CNA was superior to non-pharmacologic therapy for VVS patients. Therefore, this study is designed to compare the efficacy of CNA with pharmacologic treatment in a multicenter and randomized fashion. METHODS AND
resultsThe Cardioneuroablation versus Midodrine in Patients with Vasovagal Syncope (CAMPAIGN) study is an international multicenter, prospective, open-label, randomized controlled trial. The recurrent VVS patients with a positive response to tilt testing despite sufficient conventional treatment will be predominantly enrolled at different medical centers in China, Russia, and Turkey. All eligible participants will be randomized in a ratio of 1:1 to treatment with CNA versus midodrine, and followed up for 12 months after randomization. Approximately 184 subjects are projected to enroll from April 2023 to December 2024 with follow-up until 2025. The primary endpoint is the recurrence rate of syncope at 12 months of follow-up. The secondary endpoints are comprised of quality of life assessed with the Impact of Syncope on Quality of Life, tilt-induced syncope, blood pressure, cardiac deceleration capacity, and heart rate variability.
conclusionA prospective and multicenter clinical trial to compare outcomes of CNA with drug therapy is still lacking. The CAMPAIGN study will provide outcome-based evidence for VVS treatment strategy.
trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov: NCT05803148 (Date: March 9, 2023).
Indexed as
Identifiers
40117099What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.