JOURNAL ARTICLE
MULTICENTER STUDY
RESEARCH SUPPORT, NON-U.S. GOV'T
International Validation of the Canadian Syncope Risk Score : A Cohort Study.
Annals of Internal Medicine 2022 June
BACKGROUND: The Canadian Syncope Risk Score (CSRS) was developed to predict 30-day serious outcomes not evident during emergency department (ED) evaluation.
OBJECTIVE: To externally validate the CSRS and compare it with another validated score, the Osservatorio Epidemiologico della Sincope nel Lazio (OESIL) score.
DESIGN: Prospective cohort study.
SETTING: Large, international, multicenter study recruiting patients in EDs in 8 countries on 3 continents.
PARTICIPANTS: Patients with syncope aged 40 years or older presenting to the ED within 12 hours of syncope.
MEASUREMENTS: Composite outcome of serious clinical plus procedural events (primary outcome) and the primary composite outcome excluding procedural interventions (secondary outcome).
RESULTS: Among 2283 patients with a mean age of 68 years, the primary composite outcome occurred in 7.2%, and the composite outcome excluding procedural interventions occurred in 3.1% at 30 days. Prognostic performance of the CSRS was good for both 30-day composite outcomes and better compared with the OESIL score (area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve [AUC], 0.85 [95% CI, 0.83 to 0.88] vs. 0.74 [CI, 0.71 to 0.78] and 0.80 [CI, 0.75 to 0.84] vs. 0.69 [CI, 0.64 to 0.75], respectively). Safety of triage, as measured by the frequency of the primary composite outcome in the low-risk group, was higher using the CSRS (19 of 1388 [0.6%]) versus the OESIL score (17 of 1104 [1.5%]). A simplified model including only the clinician classification of syncope (cardiac syncope, vasovagal syncope, or other) variable at ED discharge-a component of the CSRS-achieved similar discrimination as the CSRS (AUC, 0.83 [CI, 0.80 to 0.87] for the primary composite outcome).
LIMITATION: Unable to disentangle the influence of other CSRS components on clinician classification of syncope at ED discharge.
CONCLUSION: This international external validation of the CSRS showed good performance in identifying patients at low risk for serious outcomes outside of Canada and superior performance compared with the OESIL score. However, clinician classification of syncope at ED discharge seems to explain much of the performance of the CSRS in this study. The clinical utility of the CSRS remains uncertain.
PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Swiss National Science Foundation & Swiss Heart Foundation.
OBJECTIVE: To externally validate the CSRS and compare it with another validated score, the Osservatorio Epidemiologico della Sincope nel Lazio (OESIL) score.
DESIGN: Prospective cohort study.
SETTING: Large, international, multicenter study recruiting patients in EDs in 8 countries on 3 continents.
PARTICIPANTS: Patients with syncope aged 40 years or older presenting to the ED within 12 hours of syncope.
MEASUREMENTS: Composite outcome of serious clinical plus procedural events (primary outcome) and the primary composite outcome excluding procedural interventions (secondary outcome).
RESULTS: Among 2283 patients with a mean age of 68 years, the primary composite outcome occurred in 7.2%, and the composite outcome excluding procedural interventions occurred in 3.1% at 30 days. Prognostic performance of the CSRS was good for both 30-day composite outcomes and better compared with the OESIL score (area under the receiver-operating characteristic curve [AUC], 0.85 [95% CI, 0.83 to 0.88] vs. 0.74 [CI, 0.71 to 0.78] and 0.80 [CI, 0.75 to 0.84] vs. 0.69 [CI, 0.64 to 0.75], respectively). Safety of triage, as measured by the frequency of the primary composite outcome in the low-risk group, was higher using the CSRS (19 of 1388 [0.6%]) versus the OESIL score (17 of 1104 [1.5%]). A simplified model including only the clinician classification of syncope (cardiac syncope, vasovagal syncope, or other) variable at ED discharge-a component of the CSRS-achieved similar discrimination as the CSRS (AUC, 0.83 [CI, 0.80 to 0.87] for the primary composite outcome).
LIMITATION: Unable to disentangle the influence of other CSRS components on clinician classification of syncope at ED discharge.
CONCLUSION: This international external validation of the CSRS showed good performance in identifying patients at low risk for serious outcomes outside of Canada and superior performance compared with the OESIL score. However, clinician classification of syncope at ED discharge seems to explain much of the performance of the CSRS in this study. The clinical utility of the CSRS remains uncertain.
PRIMARY FUNDING SOURCE: Swiss National Science Foundation & Swiss Heart Foundation.
Full text links
Trending Papers
Bacteremia with gram positive bacteria - when and how do I need to look for endocarditis?Clinical Microbiology and Infection 2023 August 32
Abdominal wall closure.British Journal of Surgery 2023 September 16
Antireflux surgery versus antireflux medication and risk of esophageal adenocarcinoma in patients with Barrett's esophagus.Gastroenterology 2023 September 9
Diagnosis and management of prolactin-secreting pituitary adenomas: a Pituitary Society international Consensus Statement.Nature Reviews. Endocrinology 2023 September 6
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
Read by QxMD is copyright © 2021 QxMD Software Inc. All rights reserved. By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
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