We have located links that may give you full text access.
The application of a standardized strategy of evaluation in patients with syncope referred to three syncope units.
BACKGROUND: The appropriate diagnostic work-up of patients with syncope is not well defined. We applied the guidelines of Italian 'Associazione Nazionale Medici Cardiologi Ospedalieri' to a group of consecutive patients with syncope referred to three Syncope Units. The aim of the study was to evaluate the applicability of those guidelines in the 'real world' and their impact on the use of the tests.
METHODS: We evaluated 308 consecutive patients with syncope (mean age 61 +/- 20 years; median of three syncopal episodes per patient). The hierarchy and appropriateness of diagnostic tests and the definitions of the final diagnosis followed standardized predefined criteria. In brief, all patients underwent initial evaluation consisting of history, physical examination, supine and upright blood pressure measurement and standard electrocardiogram (ECG) (only in patients > 45 years or with history of heart disease). Any subsequent investigations were based on the findings of the initial evaluation. Priority was given to cardiological tests (prolonged ECG monitoring, exercise test, electrophysiological study), or to neurally mediated tests (carotid sinus massage, tilt test, ATP test), or to neuro-psychiatric tests, as appropriate.
FINDINGS: The initial evaluation alone was diagnostic in 72 patients (23%). One further test was necessary for diagnosis in 65 patients (21%), > or = 2 tests in 64 (21%) and > or = 3 tests in 50 (16%). The diagnostic yield was 10% for ECG, 3% for echocardiogram, 16% for Holter, 5% for exercise test, 27% for electrophysiological study, 57% for carotid sinus massage, 52% for tilt testing and 15% for ATP test. At the end of the work-up the mechanism of syncope remained unexplained in 57 patients (18%).
CONCLUSIONS: When standardized criteria based on the appropriateness of indications are used, few simple tests are usually needed for diagnosis of syncope.
METHODS: We evaluated 308 consecutive patients with syncope (mean age 61 +/- 20 years; median of three syncopal episodes per patient). The hierarchy and appropriateness of diagnostic tests and the definitions of the final diagnosis followed standardized predefined criteria. In brief, all patients underwent initial evaluation consisting of history, physical examination, supine and upright blood pressure measurement and standard electrocardiogram (ECG) (only in patients > 45 years or with history of heart disease). Any subsequent investigations were based on the findings of the initial evaluation. Priority was given to cardiological tests (prolonged ECG monitoring, exercise test, electrophysiological study), or to neurally mediated tests (carotid sinus massage, tilt test, ATP test), or to neuro-psychiatric tests, as appropriate.
FINDINGS: The initial evaluation alone was diagnostic in 72 patients (23%). One further test was necessary for diagnosis in 65 patients (21%), > or = 2 tests in 64 (21%) and > or = 3 tests in 50 (16%). The diagnostic yield was 10% for ECG, 3% for echocardiogram, 16% for Holter, 5% for exercise test, 27% for electrophysiological study, 57% for carotid sinus massage, 52% for tilt testing and 15% for ATP test. At the end of the work-up the mechanism of syncope remained unexplained in 57 patients (18%).
CONCLUSIONS: When standardized criteria based on the appropriateness of indications are used, few simple tests are usually needed for diagnosis of syncope.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Challenges in Septic Shock: From New Hemodynamics to Blood Purification Therapies.Journal of Personalized Medicine 2024 Februrary 4
Molecular Targets of Novel Therapeutics for Diabetic Kidney Disease: A New Era of Nephroprotection.International Journal of Molecular Sciences 2024 April 4
The 'Ten Commandments' for the 2023 European Society of Cardiology guidelines for the management of endocarditis.European Heart Journal 2024 April 18
A Guide to the Use of Vasopressors and Inotropes for Patients in Shock.Journal of Intensive Care Medicine 2024 April 14
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app