Risk Stratification Of Syncope Research Articles

The wolf in sheep’s clothing: vasovagal syncope in acute aortic dissection

BackgroundThe presentation of acute aortic dissection can pose a challenge for emergency physicians, as it may occur without pain. Atypical presentations can lead to significant delays in diagnosis and increased mortality rates.Case descriptionOur case illustrates that isolated painless syncope can be a rare presenting symptom of acute aortic dissection type A. What is unique about our case is the limited extension of the dissection tear and the availability of Holter monitoring during the syncopal episode.ConclusionThis constellation provides insight into the pathophysiological mechanism of the syncope in this patient. Mechanisms of syncope related to acute aortic dissection are diverse. We show that vasovagal activation not related to pain can be the underlying mechanism of syncope in acute aortic dissection type A. Although excessive vasovagal tone in the setting of aortic dissection has been hypothesized in the past, it has never been as clearly illustrated as in the present case. This also highlights the challenge in risk stratification of syncope in the emergency department.

Predicting short-term adverse outcomes in the geriatric population presenting with syncope: a comparison of existing syncope rules and beyond.

Syncope at age 65+ is associated with increased mortality, irrespective of cause. Syncope rules were designed to aid in risk-stratification but were only validated in the general adult population. Our objective was to determine if they can be applied to a geriatric population in predicting short-term adverse outcomes. In this single-center retrospective study, we evaluated 350 patients aged 65+ presenting with syncope. Exclusion criteria included confirmed non-syncope, active medical condition, drug or alcohol-related syncope. Patients were stratified into high or low risk based on Canadian Syncope Risk Score (CSRS), Evaluation of Guidelines in Syncope Study (EGSYS), San Francisco Syncope Rule (SFSR), and Risk Stratification of Syncope in the Emergency Department (ROSE). Composite adverse outcomes at 48-hour and 30-day included all-cause mortality, major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events (MACCE), return emergency department visit, hospitalization, or medical intervention. We assessed each score's ability to predict the outcomes using logistic-regression and compared performances using receiver-operator curves. Multivariate analyses were performed to study the associations between recorded parameters and outcomes. CSRS outperformed with AUC of 0.732 (95% CI: 0.653-0.812) and 0.749 (95% CI: 0.688-0.809) for 48-h and 30-day outcomes, respectively. Sensitivities for CSRS, EGSYS, SFSR, and ROSE for 48-hour outcomes were 48%, 65%, 42% and 19%; and for 30-day outcomes were 72%, 65%, 30% and 55%, respectively. Atrial fibrillation/flutter on EKG, congestive heart failure, antiarrhythmics, systolic blood-pressure < 90 at triage, and associated chest pain highly correlated with 48-h outcomes. An EKG abnormality, heart disease history, severe pulmonary hypertension, BNP > 300, vasovagal predisposition, and antidepressants highly correlated with 30-day outcomes. Performance and accuracy of four prominent syncope rules were suboptimal in identifying high-risk geriatric patients with short-term adverse outcomes. We identified some significant clinical and laboratory information that may play a role in predicting short-term adverse events in a geriatric cohort.

Performance of the American Heart Association/American College of Cardiology/Heart Rhythm Society versus European Society of Cardiology guideline criteria for hospital admission of patients with syncope

Current American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Heart Rhythm Society (ACC/AHA/HRS) and European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines recommend different strategies to avoid low-yield admissions in patients with syncope. The purpose of this study was to directly compare the safety and efficacy of applying admission criteria of both guidelines to patients presenting with syncope to the emergency department in 2 multicenter studies. The international BASEL IX (BAsel Syncope EvaLuation) study (median age 71 years) and the U.S. SRS (Improving Syncope Risk Stratification in Older Adults) study (median age 72 years) were investigated. Primary endpoints were sensitivity/specificity for the adjudicated diagnosis of cardiac syncope (BASEL IX only) and 30-day major adverse cardiovascular events (30d-MACE). Among 2560 patients in the BASEL IX and 2085 in SRS studies, ACC/AHA/HRS and ESC criteria recommended admission for a comparable number of patients in BASEL IX (27% vs 28%), but ACC/AHA/HRS criteria less often in SRS (19% vs 32%; P <.01). Recommendations were discordant in ∼25% of patients. In BASEL IX, sensitivity for cardiac syncope and 30d-MACE among patients without admission criteria was comparable for ACC/AHA/HRS and ESC criteria (64% vs 65%, P = .86; and 67% vs 71%, P = .15, respectively). In SRS, sensitivity for 30d-MACE was lower with ACC/AHA/HRS (54%) vs ESC criteria (88%; P <.001). Similarly, specificity for cardiac syncope and 30d-MACE in BASEL IX was comparable for both guidelines, but in SRS the ACC/AHA/HRS guidelines showed a higher specificity for 30d-MACE than the ESC guidelines. ACC/AHA/HRS and ESC guidelines showed disagreement regarding admission for 1 in 4 patients and had only modest sensitivity, all indicating possible opportunities for improvements.

Risk stratification of syncope: Current syncope guidelines and beyond.

Syncope is an alarming event carrying the possibility of serious outcomes, including sudden cardiac death (SCD). Therefore, immediate risk stratification should be applied whenever syncope occurs, especially in the Emergency Department, where most dramatic presentations occur. It has long been known that short- and long-term syncope prognosis is affected not only by its mechanism but also by presence of concomitant conditions, especially cardiovascular disease. Over the last two decades, several syncope prediction tools have been developed to refine patient stratification and triage patients who need expert in-hospital care from those who may receive nonurgent expert care in the community. However, despite promising results, prognostic tools for syncope remain challenging and often poorly effective. Current European Society of Cardiology syncope guidelines recommend an initial syncope workup based on detailed patient's history, physical examination supine and standing blood pressure, resting ECG, and laboratory tests, including cardiac biomarkers, where appropriate. Subsequent risk stratification based on screening of features aims to identify three groups: high-, intermediate- and low-risk. The first should immediately be hospitalized and appropriately investigated; intermediate group, with recurrent or medium-risk events, requires systematic evaluation by syncope experts; low-risk group, sporadic reflex syncope, merits education about its benign nature, and discharge. Thus, initial syncope risk stratification is crucial as it determines how and by whom syncope patients are managed. This review summarizes the crucial elements of syncope risk stratification, pros and cons of proposed risk evaluation scores, major challenges in initial syncope management, and how risk stratification impacts management of high-risk/recurrent syncope.

Comparison between standard and ultrasound-integrated approach for risk stratification of syncope in the emergency department.

This prospective cohort enrolled all patients above 16years of age presenting to the in the emergency department (ED) for a reported syncope was designed to test the accuracy of a point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) integrated approach in risk stratification. The emergency physician responsible for the patient care was asked to classify the syncope risk after the initial clinical assessment and after performing POCUS evaluation. All risk group definitions were based on the 2018 European Society of Cardiology guidelines. Thirty days after the index event, all participants were followed up to assess the frequency of short-term serious outcomes as defined in the San Francisco Syncope Rule (SFSR) cohorts. We estimated the accuracy of clinical and POCUS-integrated evaluation in predicting SFSR outcomes. Between February 2016 and January 2018, 196 patients were enrolled [109 women (55.6%)]. Median age was 64years (interquartile range 31years). After a follow-up of 30days, 19 patients experienced 20 SFSR outcomes. Positive and negative likelihood ratios were 1.73 (95% CI 0.87-3.44) and 0.84 (95% CI 0.62-1.12) for the clinical evaluation, and 5.93 (95% CI 2.83-12.5) and 0.63 (95% CI 0.45-0.9) for the POCUS-integrated evaluation. The POCUS-integrated approach would reduce the diagnostic error of the clinical evaluation by 4.5 cases/100 patients. This cohort study suggested that the integration of the clinical assessment with POCUS results in patients presenting to the ED for non-high-risk syncope may increase the accuracy of predicting the risk of SFSR outcomes and the usefulness of the clinical assessment alone.

Evaluation of the use and applicability of the ESC 2018 recommendations on risk stratification of syncope in the emergency department

Complications related to syncope vary according to its etiology, which remains undetermined in approximately 20% of cases. The use of a risk stratification and patient referral protocol, such as the one proposed in the ESC 2018 recommendations, could be a solution to improve the management of syncope. To evaluate the use of syncope risk stratification protocols in an emergency department. The secondary objective is to evaluate the applicability of the ESC recommendations and their ability to stratify the risk of complications after an episode of syncope. Observational, retrospective, monocentric study conducted in the emergency department of the university hospital of Brest during February 2018 for the reasons “discomfort with or without loss of consciousness”, “chest pain”, “tachycardia”, “bradycardia”, and “suspected pulmonary embolism”. Patients who presented with a real episode of syncope or presyncope were classified into three risk groups (low, intermediate and high) according to the ESC recommendations. In total, 436 patients met the initial search criteria, of which 100 were included. No records mentioned the use of a risk stratification protocol. ESC recommendations were applicable to 87% of the records. Thirty-one percent of patients were classified as low risk, and of these, 3 patients (10%) were rehospitalized or had a complication at 1 year. Twenty-three percent of the patients were classified as intermediate risk, among them 8 patients (35%) were rehospitalized or had a complication at 1 year. Forty-six percent of the patients were at high-risk, among them 23 (50%) were rehospitalized or had a complication at 1 year ( Fig. 1 ). The use of risk stratification protocols for syncope management is not a common practice in the emergency department. According to our study, the ESC recommendations are easily applicable and seem to effectively classify patients into three risk groups. A larger study therefore seems warranted to confirm these findings.

Lifetime prevalence of syncope: the HELIUS study

Abstract Background Syncope is a common presentation to emergency departments. Cardiovascular risk differs markedly among ancestry groups, but data on syncope are scarce. Fundamental understanding of the determinants of syncope in the population might aid in the risk stratification of syncope in acute settings. Purpose To assess lifetime prevalence of syncope and its determinants in the general population. Methods We included 14937 adults (18–70 y) randomly sampled in the cross-sectional Healthy Life in an Urban Setting (HELIUS) population study, stratified by White-European, Asian, Turkish, Moroccan, and West-African ancestry. We assessed syncope history, body mass index (BMI), blood pressure (BP), supine stroke volume (SV), cardiac contractility (dP/dt), cardiac output (CO), systemic vascular resistance (SVR), and resting plasma activity of CK, an ATP-generating enzyme that facilitates cardiovascular contractility and sodium retention, counteracting hypotensive susceptibility. Results Mean age of the participants (39% men) was 43.3 y (SD 12.9). Lifetime prevalence of syncope was significantly higher in women (31%) vs. men (18%); and in White-European (34%) and other ancestries (25 to 28%), vs. West-African ancestry (19%) (Figure 1). Mean age at first syncope was 24 y (SD 13). Participants without syncope history had higher BP (systolic, +29% SD), BMI (+17% SD), CK (+31% SD) (Figure 1), modestly higher SV, dP/dt, and CO (+6 to 8% SD), and more diabetes (5.2 vs 3.6%). The main protective predictors of syncope were West-African ancestry (0.59 [0.54 to 0.65]), male sex (0.52 [0.48 to 0.57]), and CK (0.56 [0.46 to 0.69]/log CK increase), with high CK in men and West-African ancestry largely explaining the low syncope prevalence in these groups. Conclusion To our knowledge the first population study on syncope by ancestry indicates that the lifetime prevalence is high in White-European women, and low in person of African ancestry. The inverse association of syncope with the pressor enzyme CK needs further study. Funding Acknowledgement Type of funding sources: None. Figure 1. Syncope by Sex, Ancestry, and CK

Multicentre external validation of the Canadian Syncope Risk Score to predict adverse events and comparison with clinical judgement

BackgroundThe Canadian Syncope Risk Score (CSRS) has been proposed for syncope risk stratification in the emergency department (ED). The aim of this study is to perform an external multicenter validation...

17 Evidence for Combined Falls and Syncope Assessment in Older Patients

Abstract Syncope is a transient loss of consciousness due to cerebral hypoperfusion (reduced blood flow through the brain). Thirty percent of older persons who have syncope are unaware of loss of consciousness and the majority of events are not witnessed. In these cases, the patient presents with non-accidental/unexplained falls (Parry SW et al., 2005). Many of these events are not recognised. Given that most causes of syncope can be treated and further events prevented, the new ESC guidelines for syncope recommends inclusion of falls in syncope risk stratification (Brignole M et al., 2018) in older patients. These new risk stratification recommendations will be reviewed coupled with new prevalence and comorbidity information for falls in community samples and the long term consequences of hypotensive syndromes on cerebral function.

B-Type Natriuretic Peptides and Cardiac Troponins for Diagnosis and Risk-Stratification of Syncope.

The utility of BNP (B-type natriuretic peptide), NT-proBNP (N-terminal proBNP), and hs-cTn (high-sensitivity cardiac troponin) concentrations for diagnosis and risk-stratification of syncope is incompletely understood. We evaluated the diagnostic and prognostic accuracy of BNP, NT-proBNP, hs-cTnT, and hs-cTnI concentrations, alone and against those of clinical assessments, in patients >45-years old presenting with syncope to the emergency department in a prospective diagnostic multicenter study. BNP, NT-proBNP, hs-cTnT and hs-cTnI concentrations were measured in a blinded fashion. Cardiac syncope, as adjudicated by 2 physicians based on all information available including cardiac work-up and 1-year follow-up, was the diagnostic end point. EGSYS (Evaluation of Guidelines in Syncope Study), a syncope-specific diagnostic score, served as the diagnostic comparator. Death and major adverse cardiac events at 30 and 720 days were the prognostic end points. Major adverse cardiac events were defined as death, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, life-threatening arrhythmia, implantation of pacemaker/implantable cardioverter defibrillator, acute myocardial infarction, pulmonary embolism, stroke/transient ischemic attack, intracranial bleeding, or valvular surgery. ROSE (Risk Stratification of Syncope in the Emergency Department), OESIL (Osservatorio Epidemiologico della Sincope nel Lazio), SFSR (San Fransisco Syncope Rule), and CSRS (Canadian Syncope Risk Score) served as the prognostic comparators. Among 1538 patients eligible for diagnostic assessment, cardiac syncope was the adjudicated diagnosis in 234 patients (15.2%). BNP, NT-proBNP, hs-cTnT, and hs-cTnI were significantly higher in cardiac syncope versus other causes (P<0.01). The diagnostic accuracy for cardiac syncope, as quantified by the area under the curve, was 0.77 to 0.78 (95% CI, 0.74-0.81) for all 4 biomarkers, and superior to EGSYS (area under the curve, 0.68 [95%-CI 0.65-0.71], P<0.001). Combining BNP/NT-proBNP with hs-cTnT/hs-cTnI further improved diagnostic accuracy to an area under the curve of 0.81 (P<0.01). BNP, NT-proBNP, hs-cTnT, and hs-cTnI cut-offs, achieving predefined thresholds for sensitivity and specificity (95%), allowed for rule-in or rule-out of ≈30% of all patients. A total of 450 major adverse cardiac events occurred during follow-up. The prognostic accuracy of BNP, NT-proBNP, hs-cTnI, and hs-cTnT for major adverse cardiac events was moderate-to-good (area under the curve, 0.75-0.79), superior to ROSE, OESIL, and SFSR, and inferior to CSRS. BNP, NT-proBNP, hs-cTnT, and hs-cTnI concentrations provide useful diagnostic and prognostic information in emergency department patients with syncope. URL: https://www. gov. Unique identifier: NCT01548352.

A New Feasible Syncope Risk Score Appropriate for Emergency Department: A Prospective Cohort Study.

We aimed to compare current syncope risk stratification scores and propose a new more feasible and easy-to-use one. In this prospective cohort study, we enrolled all patients (≥18 years) with chief complaint of syncope if they were not eligible for admission in terms of high-risk features. San Francisco Syncope Rule, Osservatorio Epidemiologico sulla Sincope nel Lazio, and risk stratification of syncope in the emergency department scores were compared in our population. Overall, 356 patients (mean age: 44.5 years, 46.3% male) were followed for 3 months. Serious adverse events occurred in 26 (7.3%) patients including 4 deaths. Odds ratio for adverse events was 6.8 [95% confidence interval (CI), 2.8-16.1; P < 0.001; area under the curve (AUC): 66.3], 7.7 (95% CI, 3.2-18; P < 0.001; AUC: 72.8), and 18 (95% CI, 7.1-45.4; P < 0.001; AUC: 70.8) when considering San Francisco Syncope Rule, Osservatorio Epidemiologico sulla Sincope nel Lazio, and risk stratification of syncope in the emergency department scores as the predicting tools, respectively. We proposed a relatively more feasible risk score (presenting symptoms, history of cardiovascular diseases, ejection fraction <50%, and predefined electrocardiography abnormalities). According to this syncope score, odds ratio for occurring adverse events was 20.9 (95% CI, 8.4-52; P < 0.001; AUC: 79.8). The 3 syncope risk scores could somehow predict 3-month adverse events. We found more feasible indicators that could predict serious events better. It suits well for emergency department.

LO55: Role of n-terminal pro brain natriuretic peptide (NT Pro-BNP) in emergency department syncope risk stratification: a multicenter study

Introduction: Two published studies reported natriuretic peptides can aid in risk-stratification of Emergency Department (ED) syncope. We sought to assess the role of N-Terminal pro Brain Natriuretic Peptide (NT pro-BNP) to identify syncope patients at risk for serious adverse events (SAE) within 30 days of the ED visit, and its value above that of the Canadian Syncope Risk Score (CSRS). Methods: We conducted a multicenter prospective cohort study at 6 large Canadian EDs from Nov 2011 to Feb 2015. We enrolled adults who presented within 24-hours of syncope and excluded those with persistent altered mentation, obvious seizure, and intoxication. We collected patient characteristics, nine CSRS predictors (includes troponin), ED management and NT pro-BNP levels. Adjudicated serious adverse events (SAE) included death, cardiac SAE (arrhythmias, myocardial infarction, serious structural heart disease) and non-cardiac SAE (pulmonary embolism, severe hemorrhage and procedural interventions within 30-days). We used two tailed t-test and logistic regression analysis. Results: Of the 1359 patients (mean age 57.2 years, 54.7% females, 13.3% hospitalized) enrolled, 148 patients (10.9%; 0.7% deaths, 7.9% cardiac SAE including 6.1% arrhythmia) suffered SAE within 30-days. The mean NT pro-BNP values, when compared to the patients with no SAE (499.8ng/L) was significantly higher among the 56 patients who suffered SAE after ED disposition (3147ng/L, p=0.001), and among the 35 patients with cardiac SAE after ED disposition (2016.2ng/L, p=0.02). While there was a trend to higher levels among patients who suffered arrhythmia after the ED visit, it was not statistically significant (1776.4ng/L, p=0.07). In a model with CSRS predictors, the adjusted odds ratio for NT pro-BNP was 8.0 (95%CI 1.8, 35.9) and troponin was 3.8 (95%CI 1.7, 8.8). The addition of NT pro-BNP did not significantly improve the classification performance (p=0.76) with areas under the curves for CSRS was 0.91 (95%CI 0.88, 0.95) and CSRS with NT pro-BNP was 0.92 (95%CI 0.88, 0.95). Conclusion: In this multicenter study, mean NT pro-BNP levels were significantly higher among ED syncope patients who suffered SAE including cardiac SAE after ED disposition. Though NT pro-BNP was a significant independent predictor of SAE after ED disposition, it did not improve accuracy in ED syncope risk-stratification when compared to CSRS. Hence, we do not recommend NT pro-BNP measurement for ED syncope management.

Development of a Patient Decision Aid for Syncope in the Emergency Department: the SynDA Tool.

The objective was to develop a patient decision aid (DA) to promote shared decision making (SDM) for stable, alert patients who present to the emergency department (ED) with syncope. Using input from patients, clinicians, and experts in the field of syncope, health care design, and SDM, we created a prototype of a paper-based DA to engage patients in the disposition decision (admission vs. discharge) after an unremarkable ED evaluation for syncope. In phase 1, we conducted one-on-one semistructured exploratory interviews with 10 emergency physicians and 10 ED syncope patients. In phase 2, we conducted one-on-one directed interviews with 15 emergency care clinicians, five cardiologists, and 12 ED syncope patients to get detailed feedback on DA content and design. We iteratively modified the aid using feedback from each interviewee until clarity and usability had been optimized. The 11 × 17-inch, paper-based DA, titled SynDA, includes four sections: 1) explanation of syncope, 2) explanation of future risks, 3) personalized 30-day risk estimate, and 4) disposition options. The personalized risk estimate is calculated using a recently published syncope risk-stratification tool. This risk estimate is stated in natural frequency and graphically displayed using a 100-person color-coded pictogram. Patient-oriented questions are included to stimulate dialogue between patient and clinician. At the end of the development process, patient and physician participants expressed satisfaction with the clarity and usability of the DA. We iteratively developed an evidence-based DA to facilitate SDM for alert syncope patients after an unremarkable ED evaluation. Further testing is required to determine its effects on patient care. This DA has the potential to improve care for syncope patients and promote patient-centered care in emergency medicine.

Brain Natriuretic Peptides in Screening of Syncope with Cardiac Origin; a Commentary.

Syncope is a serious problem with life-time prevalence of 35%. It is estimated that 1 -3% of referrals to emergency departments and in-patient admissions are due to syncope. The underlying conditions can be cardiac or neurologic. Considering the completely different circumstances ruling the encounters with cardiac and neurologic syncope, in recent years many attempts have beenmade to find the proper tool for differentiating cardiac and non-cardiac causes of syncope. The result of which is formation of some clinical decision rules including San Francisco Syncope Rule (SFSR), Osservatorio Epidemiologico sulla Sincope nel Lazio (OESIL), Evaluation of Guidelines in Syncope Study (EGSYS), risk stratification of syncope in the emergency department (Rose), and Boston Syncope Rules. The serum marker brain natriuretic peptide (BNP), which is becoming increasingly established in emergency departments for diagnosis of acute heart failure, can reflect the presence of a structural heart disease. It seems that BNP could be considered as a screening tool in detection of syncope with cardiac origin. In a study by Wojtowicz J et al. who evaluated BNP in children and adolescents with syncope, there was no significant difference in terms of BNP level between the syncope and control groups. In contrast, Zhang Q et al. concluded that serum BNP is helpful in differentiating cardiac (958.78 § 2443.41 pg/mL) and non-cardiac (31.05 § 22.64 pg/mL) syncope. Tanimoto K et al. considered the cut-off value of 40 pg/ml for BNP in differentiating cardiac and non-cardiac syncope and found that it had 82% sensitivity and 92% specificity. A significant difference was observed in BNP level of the cardiac group (514 pg/ml) compared to the non-cardiac ones (182 pg/ml) in Pfister et al. study. It seems that, more research is needed to clarify this relationship and the variables that might play the role of confounders in a causal inference. More studies on children are required because there is some controversy regarding this relationship. Running studies with accurate methodology, large sample sizes, and in a multicentric fashion could be helpful in this regard.

Syncope Risk Stratification in the Emergency Department: Another Step Forward

Syncope Risk Stratification in the Emergency Department: Another Step Forward

Comparison of different risk stratification systems in predicting short-term serious outcome of syncope patients.

Background:Determining etiologic causes and prognosis can significantly improve management of syncope patients. The present study aimed to compare the values of San Francisco, Osservatorio Epidemiologico sulla Sincope nel Lazio (OESIL), Boston, and Risk Stratification of Syncope in the Emergency Department (ROSE) score clinical decision rules in predicting the short-term serious outcome of syncope patients.Materials and Methods:The present diagnostic accuracy study with 1-week follow-up was designed to evaluate the predictive values of the four mentioned clinical decision rules. Screening performance characteristics of each model in predicting mortality, myocardial infarction (MI), and cerebrovascular accidents (CVAs) were calculated and compared. To evaluate the value of each aforementioned model in predicting the outcome, sensitivity, specificity, positive likelihood ratio, and negative likelihood ratio were calculated and receiver-operating curve (ROC) curve analysis was done.Results:A total of 187 patients (mean age: 64.2 ± 17.2 years) were enrolled in the study. Mortality, MI, and CVA were seen in 19 (10.2%), 12 (6.4%), and 36 (19.2%) patients, respectively. Area under the ROC curve for OESIL, San Francisco, Boston, and ROSE models in prediction the risk of 1-week mortality, MI, and CVA was in the 30–70% range, with no significant difference among models (P > 0.05). The pooled model did not show higher accuracy in prediction of mortality, MI, and CVA compared to others (P > 0.05).Conclusion:This study revealed the weakness of all four evaluated models in predicting short-term serious outcome of syncope patients referred to the emergency department without any significant advantage for one among others.

Risk Stratification of Syncope in the Emergency Department, Clinical Decision Rules or Clinical Judgement?

Aim: Clinical decision tools (CDTs) have been developed to assess patients with syncope. None have shown clear superiority to identify patients at high risk of adverse outcome. The aim of this study was to validate a modified Risk Stratification of Syncope in the Emergency Department (ROSE) CDT (without a brain natriuretic peptide (BNP) assay and also evaluate a proposed ROSE-65 rule (substituting age 65 for serum BNP), comparing these with the performance of existing CDTs, the San Francisco Syncope Rule (SFSR) and the Osservatorio Epidemiologico per la Sincopenel Lazio (OESIL). Methods: This was a single center, retrospective observational study of adults presenting to the ED with syncope. OESIL, SFSR, ROSE Rule minus BNP and ROSE-65 were applied to assess outcomes at 1-week, 1-month and 1-year follow up. Results: 120 patients had data for full analysis. ROSE (minus BNP) showed sensitivity, specificity, positive and negative predictive values, and positive and negative likelihood ratios of 80.0%, 81.7%, 16.0% and 98.9%, and 4.38 and 0.25, respectively for adverse outcome at 1-week. Use of this CDT would have been prevented 26 admissions and missed 1 adverse outcome compared to clinical care at short term. The ROSE-65 showed sensitivity 80.0% and specificity 64.3%, and would have prevented 6 admissions while missing 1 adverse outcome. Both performed better than OESIL and SFSR. Conclusion: ROSE (without BNP) and ROSE-65 performed better than OESIL and SFSR in terms of sensitivity and specificity. ROSE saved 26 admissions, missing only 1 adverse outcome at short term follow up. ROSE Rule (without BNP) showed similar performance compared to the initial derivation study. The ROSE Rule, minus BNP, seems a promising tool resulting in more prevented admissions and fewer missed adverse outcomes compared to clinical care and all other CDTs.

Prognostic value of cardiac biomarkers in the risk stratification of syncope: a systematic review

The role of cardiac biomarkers in risk stratification of syncope is unclear. We undertook a systematic review to assess their predictive value for short-term major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). We conducted a systematic review using MEDLINE, EMBASE, DARE and Cochrane databases from inception to July 2014. We included studies involving adult syncope patients that evaluated cardiac biomarker levels for risk stratification during acute management and excluded case reports, reviews and studies involving children. Primary outcome (MACE) included death, cardiopulmonary resuscitation, myocardial infarction (MI), structural heart disease, pulmonary embolism, significant hemorrhage or cardiac procedural interventions. Secondary outcome analysis assessed for prediction of MI, cardiac syncope and death. Two reviewers extracted patient-level data based on the cut-off reported. Pooled sensitivities and specificities were calculated using patient-level data. A total of 1862 articles were identified, and 11 studies with 4246 patients were included. Studies evaluated 3 biomarkers: contemporary troponin (2693 patients), natriuretic peptides (1353 patients) and high-sensitive troponin (819 patients). The pooled sensitivities and specificities for MACE were: contemporary troponin 0.29 (95 % CI 0.24, 0.34) and 0.88 (95 % CI 0.86, 0.89); natriuretic peptides 0.77 (95 % CI 0.69, 0.85) and 0.73 (95 % CI 0.70, 0.76); high-sensitive troponin 0.74 (95 % CI 0.65, 0.83) and 0.65 (95 % CI 0.62, 0.69), respectively. Natriuretic peptides and high-sensitive troponin showed good diagnostic characteristics for both primary and secondary outcomes. Natriuretic peptides and high-sensitive troponin might be useful in risk stratification.

Syncope clinical management in the emergency department: a consensus from the first international workshop on syncope risk stratification in the emergency department

The optimal emergency department (ED) evaluation of syncope is uncertain. Research reports from multiple countries suggest extensive practice variation, high costs, and questionable benefit associated with current approaches.1–5 Moreover, only a few of the recommendations from international syncope guidelines deal with ED management.6–8 For example, the European Society of Cardiology guidelines, which are the most inclusive syncope guidelines, do not address the ED management. This could be due to limited evidence on how to stratify the risk and decide on disposition of these patients in the ED.1,9 We organized a multi-specialty workshop of North American and European syncope experts on 26–27 September 2013 in Gargnano, Italy, with the aim of obtaining a modified Delphi consensus on the best way to manage ED syncope patients. As already described,10 we followed a four-step conceptual model for the ED decision-making in syncope: (i) Is it syncope? (ii) Is there a serious underlying condition identified in the ED? (iii) If the cause is uncertain, what is the risk of a serious outcome? (iv) For a given risk profile, how can these patients be best managed in the ED and what evaluation and restrictions are required? ( Figure 1 ) . Figure 1 Conceptual model: ED management of syncope. Expert recruitment and consensus development have been described previously.10 Details can be found in Supplementary material online, Appendix S1 . The full list of questions and answers to the first and second survey rounds as well as the degree of agreement on each item is reported in Supplementary material online, Appendix S2 . According to the ESC guidelines, syncope is defined as a …

Utility of Routine Transthoracic Echocardiography in Hospitalized Syncope Patients Risk Stratified by EGSYS Score

Utility of Routine Transthoracic Echocardiography in Hospitalized Syncope Patients Risk Stratified by EGSYS Score Background: The yield of routine transthoracic echocardiography (TTE) in the diagnosis and risk stratification of syncope has been a subject of debate. Purpose and Methods: To compare the yield of TTE in different risk categories of syncope patients, we performed a retrospective study of patients who had a TTE with an admission diagnosis of syncope. The patients were then stratified into low and high risk categories based on their Evaluation of Guidelines in Syncope Study (EGSYS) score of 3, respectively. Three downstream health resources were evaluated: cardiology consultation, further testing and therapeutic interventions after TTE was done. Results: Of the study group, 65% (295/456) of patients were found to have utilized no downstream health resources. The remaining 35% (161/456) had at least used 1 resource; 29.2% (133/456) utilized 1, 5% (23/456) utilized 2 and 1.1% (5/456) utilized all 3 of these resources. Of the total study group, 51% (233/456) were low risk for cardiac syncope according to the EGSYS score. Only 23.2% (54/233) of these low risk patients utilized 1 or more of the downstream health resources, but no patients in this group needed any cardiac intervention. Conclusion: There was a significant difference of the yield and thus incremental value of TTE between high and low risk group categories based on the EGSYS score. A low EGSYS score seems to be a good initial tool in identifying patients who likely will not require additional interventions related to further downstream testing.