Abordaje diagnóstico y terapéutico del síncope en urgencias / Diagnostic and therapeutic approach of syncope in the emergency room

El síncope, definido como un cuadro de pérdida completa y transitoria de la conciencia con recuperación espontánea en un breve intervalo de tiempo debido a disminución del flujo sanguíneo cerebral, es un motivo frecuente de consulta en los servicios de urgencias. El síncope puede ser debido a múltiples causas con significado pronóstico muy variable. El papel del médico de urgencias consiste, en primer lugar, en diferenciar el síncope de otras causas de pérdida de conciencia, y luego intentar establecer la etiología más probable y perfilar la gravedad pronóstica, lo cual se puede conseguir mediante métodos sencillos y fácilmente disponibles. En este trabajo se describen someramente los diferentes mecanismos del síncope, los métodos para llegar a un diagnóstico etiológico, los criterios de ingreso hospitalario y el enfoque terapéutico (AU)

Syncope, defined as a transient lost of conciousness with spontaneous recovery in a short period of time due to an acute diminution of cerebral blood flow, is a frequent cause of admission in the emergency room. Syncope has multiple etiologies with very different pronostic implications. The role of the emergency room physician is, firstly, to differentiate syncope from nonsyncopal causes of lost of consciousness, and, secondly, to try to establish the most probable etiological diagnosis and its pronostic relevance by means of relatively simple and easily available tools. In this paper we describe the pathophysiology of syncope, its diagnostic approach and the criteria for hospital admission. Finally, some therapeutic recommendations are provided (AU)

Reproducibility of sequential head-up tilt testing in patients with recent syncope, normal ECG and no structural heart disease.

AIMS: To assess the reproducibility of the response to sequential head-up tilt tests. METHODS AND RESULTS: A head-up tilt test was performed early after syncope in 127 patients with a normal ECG and no structural heart disease. Patients with a positive response (82 patients) were randomized to two (1 week and 2 weeks later) or one (2 weeks later) additional head-up tilt tests, and patients with a negative response (45 patients) were randomized to a second head-up tilt test 1 or 2 weeks after the first. The reproducibility of a positive response in the second head-up tilt test was 80% after 1 week and 53% after 2 weeks (P<0.01). Only 53% of the patients with a positive response to a first and second head-up tilt test had a positive response to a third (P=0.01). Intra-individual variation in the time to a positive response was wide. The reproducibility of the cardioinhibitory responses was very poor. Reproducibility of a negative response was 80%. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with recent syncope, the rate of positive responses decreases with sequential head-up tilt tests. Furthermore, the time to a positive response in different head-up tilt tests shows important intra-individual variations, and the reproducibility of the cardioinhibitory responses is very poor. In contrast, the reproducibility of the negative responses is high.

Variations in diagnostic yield of head-up tilt test and electrophysiology in groups of patients with syncope of unknown origin.

AIMS: To assess the diagnostic yield of the head-up tilt test and electrophysiology in different groups of patients with syncope of unknown origin established according to simple clinical criteria. METHODS AND RESULTS: Six hundred consecutive patients with syncope of unknown origin submitted to a tilt test. Two hundred and forty seven of them also underwent electrophysiology. Patients were divided into groups according to age at the time of first syncope, ECG findings and the presence of organic heart disease. Positive responses to the tilt test were more common in patients who had suffered their first syncope at an age equal to or below 65 years (group I) than in older patients (group II) (47% vs 33%, P<0.05, OR 1.8, CI 1.2-2.78), and in patients with a normal ECG and without organic heart disease than in the other subgroups of patients (47% vs 37%, P<0.008, OR 1.6). The lowest rate of positive response was observed in older patients with an abnormal ECG and organic heart disease. Electrophysiology disclosed abnormal findings in group II more often than in group I (23% vs 7%, P<0.001, OR 3.7, CI 1.7-9.2). The diagnostic yield from electrophysiology was higher in patients with an abnormal ECG than in those with a normal ECG (22% vs 3.7%, P<0.0005, OR 7.1), and it was especially low in patients with a normal ECG and without organic heart disease (2.6%). CONCLUSION: The diagnostic yield of the tilt test and electrophysiology differs in groups of patients with syncope of unknown origin, established according to simple clinical criteria. These findings have a bearing on selecting the most appropriate test in a particular patient.

[Pericardial effusion in the elderly: A different disease?]. / Derrame pericárdico en el paciente anciano: una enfermedad diferente?

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of the present study was to assess possible differences in etiologic spectrum and clinical course of pericardial effusion in elderly patients, as has been previously suggested, and therefore determine whether clinical, management should be based on patient age. METHODS: All echocardiograms performed in our hospital from 1990 to 1996 were screened for pericardial effusion, and those with moderate or large effusions were selected. Patients under 66 years of age were included in group I, and those above 65 years were assigned to group II. RESULTS: We selected 322 patients with moderate (122) or with large (200) effusions. 221 patients being included in group I (aged 15-65, mean 47) and 101 in group II (aged 66-88, mean 72.5). Effusion was large in 60% of group I and in 66% of group II (p = NS), and tamponade occurred in 36% and 38.6%, respectively (p = NS). Specific pericardial infections (tuberculous and purulent pericarditis) were more frequent in group I (5.9 versus 0.9%; p < 0.05). No significant differences were found in incidence of idiopathic (33 vs 38%) or neoplastic (14.4 vs 10.8%) etiologies. During follow-up (96% of the patients, median time of 11 months, range 1-58 months) the mortality (24 vs 30%) and evolution to cardiac constriction (4 vs 2%) were similar in the two groups, but persistence of effusion was more common in group II (6.3 vs 14%; p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that etiology, clinical course and prognosis of moderate and large pericardial effusion are, in general, similar in elderly and younger patients. Thus, management should be similar in the different age groups, and no etiologic form of pericardial disease should be ruled out because of patient's age when considering the differential diagnosis.

Clinical clues to the causes of large pericardial effusions.

PURPOSE: To examine whether the size of the effusion, the presence of tamponade, and inflammatory signs are useful in determining the causes of moderate or severe pericardial effusions. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: All echocardiograms performed at a general hospital between January 1990 and April 1996 were screened for pericardial effusion. Patients with moderate (echo-free space of 10 to 20 mm during diastole) or severe (echo-free space >20 mm) effusions were studied. RESULTS: We identified 322 patients (166 [52%] men, mean [+/- SD] age 56 +/- 17 years [range 15 to 88 years]), 132 (41%) with moderate and 190 (59%) with severe pericardial effusion. The most frequent etiologic diagnoses were acute idiopathic pericarditis (n = 66 [20%]), iatrogenic effusions (n = 50 [16%]), cancer (n = 43 [13%]), and chronic idiopathic pericardial effusion (n = 29 [9%]). In 192 (60%) of the patients, the cause of the effusion was a known medical condition. In the 130 other patients, inflammatory signs were associated with acute idiopathic pericarditis (likelihood ratio = 5. 4, P < 0.001), severe effusions without inflammatory signs or tamponade were associated with chronic idiopathic pericardial effusion (likelihood ratio = 20, P < 0.001), and tamponade without inflammatory signs was associated with malignant effusions (likelihood ratio = 2.9, P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: In many patients, pericardial effusions are due to a known underlying disease or condition. In patients without underlying diseases, inflammatory signs, the size of effusion, and the presence or absence of cardiac tamponade can be helpful in establishing cause.

[The clinical practice guidelines of the Sociedad Española de Cardiología on pericardial pathology]. / Guías de práctica clínica de la Sociedad Española de Cardiología en patología pericárdica.

The pericardium is a serous membrane consisting of two layers (parietal and visceral), which may be involved by different infectious, physical, traumatic, or inflammatory agents as well as in metabolic or systemic diseases. The reactions of the pericardium to these insults result in rather nonspecific clinical features, such as the characteristic inflammatory findings in acute pericarditis, the development of pericardial effusion with the possible complication of cardiac tamponade, and a fibrous retractile reaction that may lead to constrictive pericarditis. These phenomena are not mutually exclusive and can be simultaneous or consecutive in the same patient; however, for the sake of clarity they are independently discussed. The aim of the present guidelines is to provide orientation about the management of patients with pericardial disease. Such management should basically rest on the knowledge of the clinical and epidemiological features (such as disease frequency) of the different types of pericardial disease that determine the diagnostic and therapeutic yield of the different invasive pericardial procedures (pericardiocentesis, pericardial biopsy and pericardiectomy), and, therefore, their respective indications. In addition, the indication of the different types of medical therapy are discussed. On the other hand, emphasis is made on the possible limitation of the validity of these guidelines for patients belonging to geographical areas or socioeconomic contexts with different etiologic spectra.

Tratamiento de la pericarditis aguda y crónica / Treatment of acute and chronic pericarditis

Hay una gran variedad de agentes infecciosos, físicos, traumáticos, inflamatorios, metabólicos y de otra índole que pueden afectar el pericardio. La reacción del pericardio ante estas diferentes agresiones se traduce en forma de unas manifestaciones clínicas relativamente inespecíficas como son los síntomas inflamatorios propios de la pericarditis aguda, la producción de líquido en el saco pericárdico con la eventual posibilidad de taponamiento cardíaco, y la reacción fibrosa-retráctil del pericardio que puede conducir a la pericarditis constrictiva. Estas manifestaciones no son excluyentes entre sí y pueden coincidir o sucederse en la evolución clínica en un mismo paciente, pero a efectos de claridad de exposición se comentan de forma independiente.El objetivo de este artículo es comentar el tratamiento de las pericarditis agudas y crónicas de una forma sindrómica general completada con los aspectos particulares de las etiologías concretas más frecuentes.Por extensión se comenta el manejo del derrame pericárdico crónico, del taponamiento y de la pericarditis constrictiva. (AU)

Long-term follow-up of idiopathic chronic pericardial effusion.

BACKGROUND: A large idiopathic chronic pericardial effusion can be defined as a collection of pericardial fluid that persists for more than three months and has no apparent cause. We conducted a prospective study of the natural history and treatment of this disorder. METHODS: Between 1977 and 1992, we prospectively evaluated and enrolled patients with large idiopathic chronic pericardial effusion. We performed pericardiocentesis in most of the patients. We performed pericardiectomy when large pericardial effusion reappeared after pericardiocentesis. Follow-up ranged from 18 months to 20 years (median, 7 years). RESULTS: During the study period, we evaluated a total of 1108 patients with pericarditis, 461 of whom had large pericardial effusion. Twenty-eight of these patients (age range, 7 to 85 years; median, 61) had large idiopathic chronic effusion and were included in the study. The duration of effusion ranged from 6 months to 15 years (median, 3 years). At the initial evaluation, 13 patients were asymptomatic. Overt tamponade was found in eight patients (29 percent). Therapeutic pericardiocentesis, performed in 24 patients, was followed by the disappearance of or marked reduction in the effusion in 8. Five of the 24 patients underwent early pericardiectomy, and in 11 large pericardial effusion reappeared. Cardiac catheterization, performed in 16 patients, showed elevated intrapericardial pressure (4.75+/-3.79 mm Hg) and reduced transmural pressure (1.0+/-2.50 mm Hg) before pericardiocentesis. Both of these abnormalities in pressure improved significantly after pericardiocentesis. Pericardiectomy, performed in 20 patients, yielded excellent long-term results. At the end of the follow-up period, 10 patients had died, but none had died from pericardial disease. CONCLUSIONS: Large idiopathic chronic pericardial effusion is well tolerated for long periods in most patients, but severe tamponade can develop unexpectedly at any time. Pericardiocentesis alone frequently results in the resolution of large effusions, but recurrence is common and pericardiectomy should be considered whenever a large effusion recurs after pericardiocentesis.

Correlation between clinical and Doppler echocardiographic findings in patients with moderate and large pericardial effusion: implications for the diagnosis of cardiac tamponade.

BACKGROUND: Clinical data are of unquestionable value for management purposes in cardiac tamponade, whereas the precise value of Doppler echocardiographic findings is not yet fully understood. We aimed to prospectively assess the correlation between clinical and Doppler echocardiographic signs in the diagnosis of cardiac tamponade in a large series of patients with pericardial effusion. METHODS: During a 2-year period, all patients with moderate and large pericardial effusion were prospectively assessed. The presence of clinical findings suggesting cardiac tamponade, right cardiac chamber collapse on the echocardiogram, and Doppler venous flow pattern were simultaneously evaluated. RESULTS: One hundred ten patients were included (49 with moderate and 61 with large effusions). Thirty-eight patients showed clinical features suggestive of cardiac tamponade and 72 did not. In patients with clinical tamponade, 90% had collapse of one or more right cardiac chambers, but 4 (10%) did not have any collapse. Venous flow was analyzable in 63%, suggesting tamponade in 75% of the patients. In patients without clinical tamponade, 34% showed collapse of one or more cardiac chambers. Venous flow pattern was normal in 80%, inconclusive in 11%, and only suggestive of tamponade in 9% of patients. If clinical features of tamponade were considered the diagnostic standard, sensitivity and specificity would be 90% and 65% for the presence of any collapse, 68% and 66% for right atrial collapse, 60% and 90% for right ventricular collapse, and 45% and 92% for simultaneous collapse of both chambers. Sensitivity and specificity of venous flow analysis would be 75% and 91%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: There is a good correlation between absence of collapse and absence of tamponade, but the correlation is poor between collapse and tamponade. Abnormal venous flow has a good correlation with clinical features of tamponade, with a higher sensitivity than right ventricular collapse and a much higher specificity than right atrial collapse.

Clinical usefulness of head-up tilt test in patients with syncope and intraventricular conduction defect.

Head-up tilt test was performed in 99 patients with syncope of unknown origin and intraventricular conduction defect. Twenty-five per cent had a positive response to tilt with reproduction of spontaneous clinical symptoms. Holter recording revealed paroxysmal atrioventricular (AV) block in three patients. Carotid sinus massage was positive in four patients. An electrophysiological study was performed in 76 patients with abnormal findings in 17 (22%). Thus, vasovagal syncope was the discharge diagnosis in 25 patients (25%). Therefore, tilt test should be considered in patients with intraventricular conduction defect presenting with syncope of unknown origin, especially if clinical findings suggest the possibility of a vasovagal mechanism, or if the results of the electrophysiological study are inconclusive.

Should pericardial drainage be performed routinely in patients who have a large pericardial effusion without tamponade?

PURPOSE: To assess whether drainage of pericardial effusion by pericardiocentesis or surgery is justified as a routine measure in the initial management of patients with large pericardial effusion without tamponade or suspected purulent pericarditis. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: All patients with large pericardial effusion without tamponade or suspected purulent pericarditis who were seen at our institution during a span of 6 years (1990 to 1995) were retrospectively (46) or prospectively (25) reviewed. Large pericardial effusion was defined as a sum of echo-free pericardial spaces in diastole exceeding 20 mm. RESULTS: Large pericardial effusion was diagnosed in 162 patients, 71 of whom fulfilled criteria for inclusion. Of these, 26 underwent a pericardial drainage procedure. Diagnostic yield was 7%, as only 2 specific diagnoses were made using these procedures. During follow-up (95% of patients, median 10 months), no patient developed cardiac tamponade or died as a result of pericardial disease, nor did any new diagnoses become manifest in the 45 patients who did not have pericardial drainage initially. Moderate or large effusions persisted in only 2 of 45 patients managed conservatively. CONCLUSIONS: Routine pericardial drainage procedures have a very low diagnostic yield in patients with large pericardial effusion without tamponade or suspected purulent pericarditis, and no clear therapeutic benefit is obtained with this approach. Clinical outcomes depend on underlying diseases, and do not appear to be influenced by drainage of pericardial fluid.

[The tilt-table test: is it essential for adequate treatment of vasovagal syncope? Arguments in favor]. / Test de mesa basculante: es imprescindible para el tratamiento adecuado del síncope vasovagal? Argumentos a favor.

Head-Up tilt test (HUT) permits the identification of vasovagal syncope in patients with syncope of unknown origin. Several authors have pointed out its usefulness for the therapeutic management of these patients. However, even though it has limitations, this paper discusses those situations in which HUT may be useful. First, as HUT permits the recognition of the etiologic diagnosis of syncope, it may be helpful in the evaluation of its treatment. On the other hand, the characterization of different components of vasovagal reaction, cardioinhibition and/or vasodepressor response, may be helpful in the selection of therapeutic options. It has been suggested that the performance of HUT may even be beneficial for the relapses of vasovagal syncope in patients with recurrent syncope and refractory to other treatments. Finally, further randomized clinical trials in HUT will help to establish the prediction of therapeutic effectiveness in patients with vasovagal syncope. However, there are important limitations to its usefulness for the clinical management of individual patients.

Limitations of head-up tilt test for evaluating the efficacy of therapeutic interventions in patients with vasovagal syncope: results of a controlled study of etilefrine versus placebo.

OBJECTIVES: This study assessed the efficacy of oral etilefrine (10 mg three times a day) in preventing a positive response to head-up tilt testing. BACKGROUND: Previous reports have suggested that oral etilefrine can be effective either in preventing a positive response to head-up tilt testing or in reducing syncopal recurrences in patients with vasovagal syncope. Up to now most studies assessing drug therapy in these patients have been uncontrolled. METHODS: This was a randomized double-blind crossover study of etilefrine versus placebo in 30 consecutive patients with syncope and a baseline positive head-up tilt test. After the first test, patients had no treatment for 3 days and were randomized to receive etilefrine or placebo for 4 additional days. They underwent tilt testing under treatment and again after 3 days of washout; they then received the alternative treatment for 4 days, and a third test was performed. RESULTS: Head-up tilt test results were negative in 13 (43%) patients with etilefrine and 15 (50%) with placebo (p = NS). Therefore, the statistical power of the study was only 10%. The rate of positive responses decreased with repeated testing irrespective of the assigned treatment: A positive response was obtained during the second head-up tilt test in 20 patients (10 with placebo, 10 with etilefrine) but in only 12 during the third (7 with etilefrine, 5 with placebo) (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Oral etilefrine (10 mg three times a day) was not superior to placebo in preventing a positive response to head-up tilt testing. Despite a low statistical power, the high rate of negative response with placebo (50%) suggests that controlled trials are needed to assess the real efficacy of any treatment in patients with vasovagal syncope.

Purulent pericarditis: review of a 20-year experience in a general hospital.

OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this study was to review the features of purulent pericarditis in patients from a general hospital during a recent 20-year period. BACKGROUND: Although studies published from 1974 to 1977 suggested a changing spectrum for purulent pericarditis, this view has not been proved. METHODS: We retrospectively evaluated the records of 33 patients from one general hospital who had a diagnosis of purulent pericarditis during the period 1972 to 1991. All autopsy protocols from the same period were also reviewed. In 19 patients (group I), the condition was diagnosed during life; in 14 (group II), it was identified at autopsy. RESULTS: In group I, the possible sources of pericardial infection were identified in 17 patients; pneumonia (6 patients) was the most common source. Empyema was present in 10 patients; 15 had cardiac tamponade. The most common microorganisms were streptococci, pneumococci and staphylococci. Six patients developed constrictive pericarditis and required pericardiectomy. Three patients died, 1 patient was lost to follow up and 15 patients had a favorable outcome at a mean follow-up interval of 35 months. In group II, the clinical diagnoses included pneumonia (five patients) among other infections, with empyema in six patients. Purulent pericarditis was probably the direct cause of death in two patients. CONCLUSIONS: In our experience, the spectrum of purulent pericarditis has not changed in recent years. Many patients do not have the classical findings of pericarditis, and diagnosis is made only at autopsy or after tamponade has developed. Empyema remains a common predisposing condition. Purulent pericarditis is still a severe disease, but its prognosis is excellent in patients who can be discharged from the hospital.

[An analysis of the responses to the tilt-table test depending on the clinical characteristics of the syncopal episodes in patients without apparent cardiopathy]. / Análisis de las respuestas a la prueba en tabla basculante en función de las características clínicas de los episodios sincopales en pacientes sin cardiopatía aparente.

Seventy-six consecutive patients were evaluated to assess whether the response to head-up tilt test was related to the type of clinical presentation in patients with syncope of unknown origin and free from heart disease. The syncopal attacks were clinically characterized in a prospective fashion before the tilt test. In 44 patients (group I) syncope had been preceded by autonomic symptoms or was associated with recent or static sustained orthostatism. In 32 patients (group II), syncope had been sudden, without prodromal or autonomic symptoms. Mean age was 49 +/- 17 years in group I patients and 47 +/- 17 years in group II patients (NS). The degree of tilt was 75 degrees. During 30 min no drugs were administered, and then isoproterenol was infused for an additional 20 min (1-5 micrograms/min until a maximal heart rate of 140 bpm was achieved). Tilt test was considered as positive when the patient developed syncope or presyncope with hypotension. Tilt test was positive in 33 patients from group I (75%) and 12 from group II (37.5%)(p = 0.001). The positive response developed within the 30 initial min of the test (without isoproterenol infusion) in 19 of 33 patients from group I (57%) and in 3 of 12 patients from group II (25%) (p = 0.053). It is concluded that the response to tilt test is related to the clinical features of syncopal attacks.

Electrical cardioversion after amiodarone administration.

The possible effect of amiodarone administration on the effectiveness and complications of electrical cardioversion of supraventricular tachyarrhythmias has not been properly assessed. To investigate the effects of amiodarone on cardioversion, we performed 130 electrical cardioversion procedures in 116 patients who were receiving long-term amiodarone therapy (group I) and 44 cardioversion procedures in 43 patients who were receiving intravenous infusions of amiodarone (group II). All patients in groups I and II had atrial fibrillation or flutter. In group I, there was a higher incidence of ventricular premature beats than in a control group of patients who underwent 100 cardioversions; one patient had severe bradycardia with asystole, which was resolved satisfactorily. In group II there was a higher incidence of sinus bradycardia and ventricular premature beats. It was concluded that electrical cardioversion of supraventricular arrhythmias can be safely performed in patients who are receiving long-term oral or intravenous amiodarone therapy if the usual precautions are observed.