Asunto(s)
Hipersensibilidad Tardía , Trometamina , Humanos , Hipersensibilidad Tardía/inducido químicamente , Femenino , Trometamina/efectos adversos , Pruebas del Parche , Administración Oral , Persona de Mediana Edad , Erupciones por Medicamentos/etiología , Masculino , Cetoprofeno/análogos & derivadosRESUMEN
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.
Asunto(s)
Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Síncope , Anciano , Canadá , Estudios de Cohortes , Humanos , Estudios Prospectivos , Medición de Riesgo , Factores de Riesgo , Síncope/diagnóstico , Síncope/terapiaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVE: To develop an ECG-based tool for rapid risk assessment of a cardiac cause of syncope in patients ≥40 years. METHODS: In a prospective international multicentre study, 2007 patients ≥40 years presenting with syncope were recruited in the emergency department (ED) of participating centres ranging from large university hospitals to smaller rural hospitals in eight countries from May 2010 to July 2017. 12-Lead ECG recordings were obtained at ED presentation following the syncopal event. The primary diagnostic outcome, a cardiac cause of syncope, was centrally adjudicated by two independent cardiologists using all available clinical information including 12-month follow-up. ECG predictors for a cardiac cause of syncope were identified using penalised backward selection and a continuous-scale likelihood was calculated based on regression analysis coefficients. Findings were validated in an independent US multicentre cohort including 2269 patients. RESULTS: In the derivation cohort, a cardiac cause of syncope was adjudicated in 267 patients (16%). Seven ECG criteria were identified as predictors for this outcome: heart rate and QTc-interval (continuous predictors), rhythm, atrioventricular block, ST-segment depression, bundle branch block and ventricular extrasystole/non-sustained ventricular tachycardia (categorical predictors). Diagnostic accuracy of these combined predictors for a cardiac cause of syncope was high (area under the curve 0.80, 95% CI 0.77 to 0.83). Overall, 138 patients (8%) were rapidly triaged towards rule-out and 181 patients (11%) towards rule-in of a cardiac cause of syncope. External validation showed similar performance. CONCLUSION: In patients ≥40 years with a syncopal event, a combination of seven ECG criteria enabled rapid assessment of the likelihood that syncope was due to a cardiac cause. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT01548352 (BASEL IX), NCT01802398 (SRS study).
Asunto(s)
Electrocardiografía/métodos , Frecuencia Cardíaca/fisiología , Medición de Riesgo/métodos , Síncope/diagnóstico , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Servicio de Urgencia en Hospital , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Prospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Síncope/epidemiología , Síncope/etiología , Factores de TiempoRESUMEN
AIMS: The aim of this study is to characterize recurrent syncope, including sex-specific aspects, and its impact on death and major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). METHODS AND RESULTS: We characterized recurrent syncope in a large international multicentre study, enrolling patients ≥40 years presenting to the emergency department (ED) with a syncopal event within the last 12 h. Syncope aetiology was centrally adjudicated by two independent cardiologists using all information becoming available during syncope work-up and long-term follow-up. Overall, 1790 patients were eligible for this analysis. Incidence of recurrent syncope was 20% [95% confidence interval (CI) 18-22%] within the first 24 months. Patients with an adjudicated final diagnosis of cardiac syncope (hazard ratio (HR) 1.50, 95% CI 1.11-2.01) or syncope with an unknown aetiology even after central adjudication (HR 2.11, 95% CI 1.54-2.89) had an increased risk for syncope recurrence. Least Absolute Shrinkage and Selection Operator regression fit on all patient information available early in the ED identified >3 previous episodes of syncope as the only independent predictor for recurrent syncope (HR 2.13, 95% CI 1.64-2.75). Recurrent syncope carried an increased risk for death (HR 1.87, 95% CI 1.26-2.77) and MACE (HR 2.69, 95% CI 2.02-3.59) over 24 months of follow-up, however, with a time-dependent effect. These findings were confirmed in a sensitivity analysis excluding patients with syncope recurrence or MACE before or during ED evaluation. CONCLUSION: Recurrence rates of syncope are substantial and vary depending on syncope aetiology. Importantly, recurrent syncope carries a time-dependent increased risk for death and MACE. TRIAL REGISTRATION: BAsel Syncope EvaLuation (BASEL IX, ClinicalTrials.gov registry number NCT01548352).