Literature DB >> 29349639

Outcomes in syncope research: a systematic review and critical appraisal.

Monica Solbiati1,2, Viviana Bozzano3, Franca Barbic4, Giovanni Casazza5, Franca Dipaola4, James V Quinn6, Matthew J Reed7, Robert S Sheldon8, Win-Kuang Shen9, Benjamin C Sun10, Venkatesh Thiruganasambandamoorthy11, Raffaello Furlan4, Giorgio Costantino12.   

Abstract

Syncope is the common clinical manifestation of different diseases, and this makes it difficult to define what outcomes should be considered in prognostic studies. The aim of this study is to critically analyze the outcomes considered in syncope studies through systematic review and expert consensus. We performed a systematic review of the literature to identify prospective studies enrolling consecutive patients presenting to the Emergency Department with syncope, with data on the characteristics and incidence of short-term outcomes. Then, the strengths and weaknesses of each outcome were discussed by international syncope experts to provide practical advice to improve future selection and assessment. 31 studies met our inclusion criteria. There is a high heterogeneity in both outcome choice and incidence between the included studies. The most commonly considered 7-day outcomes are mortality, dysrhythmias, myocardial infarction, stroke, and rehospitalisation. The most commonly considered 30-day outcomes are mortality, haemorrhage requiring blood transfusion, dysrhythmias, myocardial infarction, pacemaker or implantable defibrillator implantation, stroke, pulmonary embolism, and syncope relapse. We present a critical analysis of the pros and cons of the commonly considered outcomes, and provide possible solutions to improve their choice in ED syncope studies. We also support global initiatives to promote the standardization of patient management and data collection.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Consensus; Emergency Department; Outcomes; Risk stratification; Syncope; Systematic review

Mesh:

Year:  2018        PMID: 29349639     DOI: 10.1007/s11739-018-1788-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Intern Emerg Med        ISSN: 1828-0447            Impact factor:   3.397


  40 in total

1.  Syncope: the emergency department and beyond.

Authors:  Catriona Williamson; Matthew James Reed
Journal:  Intern Emerg Med       Date:  2015-09-07       Impact factor: 3.397

2.  Simple risk stratification score for prognosis of syncope.

Authors:  Daniel Garcia Gomes; Teresa Kus; Roberto Tofani Sant'anna; Gustavo Glotz de Lima; Vidal Essebag; Tiago L Luz Leiria
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2016-07-09       Impact factor: 1.900

3.  Can elderly patients without risk factors be discharged home when presenting to the emergency department with syncope?

Authors:  Shamai A Grossman; David Chiu; Lewis Lipsitz; J Lawrence Mottley; Nathan I Shapiro
Journal:  Arch Gerontol Geriatr       Date:  2013-08-08       Impact factor: 3.250

4.  Do outcomes of near syncope parallel syncope?

Authors:  Shamai A Grossman; Mathew Babineau; Laura Burke; Adarsh Kancharla; Lawrence Mottley; Andrea Nencioni; Nathan I Shapiro
Journal:  Am J Emerg Med       Date:  2010-12-24       Impact factor: 2.469

5.  2017 ACC/AHA/HRS Guideline for the Evaluation and Management of Patients With Syncope: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task Force on Clinical Practice Guidelines and the Heart Rhythm Society.

Authors:  Win-Kuang Shen; Robert S Sheldon; David G Benditt; Mitchell I Cohen; Daniel E Forman; Zachary D Goldberger; Blair P Grubb; Mohamed H Hamdan; Andrew D Krahn; Mark S Link; Brian Olshansky; Satish R Raj; Roopinder Kaur Sandhu; Dan Sorajja; Benjamin C Sun; Clyde W Yancy
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  2017-03-09       Impact factor: 24.094

Review 6.  Incidence, etiology and predictors of adverse outcomes in 43,315 patients presenting to the Emergency Department with syncope: an international meta-analysis.

Authors:  Fabrizio D'Ascenzo; Giuseppe Biondi-Zoccai; Matthew J Reed; Gelareh Z Gabayan; Masaru Suzuki; Giorgio Costantino; Raffaello Furlan; Andrea Del Rosso; Francois P Sarasin; Benjamin C Sun; Maria Grazia Modena; Fiorenzo Gaita
Journal:  Int J Cardiol       Date:  2011-12-20       Impact factor: 4.164

7.  Risk stratification of patients with syncope in an accident and emergency department.

Authors:  S D Crane
Journal:  Emerg Med J       Date:  2002-01       Impact factor: 2.740

8.  Failure to validate the San Francisco Syncope Rule in an independent emergency department population.

Authors:  Adrienne Birnbaum; David Esses; Polly Bijur; Andrew Wollowitz; E John Gallagher
Journal:  Ann Emerg Med       Date:  2008-02-20       Impact factor: 5.721

9.  External validation of the San Francisco Syncope Rule in the Australian context.

Authors:  Teresa M Cosgriff; Anne-Maree Kelly; Debra Kerr
Journal:  CJEM       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 2.410

10.  Development of the Canadian Syncope Risk Score to predict serious adverse events after emergency department assessment of syncope.

Authors:  Venkatesh Thiruganasambandamoorthy; Kenneth Kwong; George A Wells; Marco L A Sivilotti; Muhammad Mukarram; Brian H Rowe; Eddy Lang; Jeffrey J Perry; Robert Sheldon; Ian G Stiell; Monica Taljaard
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2016-07-04       Impact factor: 8.262

View more
  3 in total

1.  Outcomes in syncope research: it is time to standardize.

Authors:  Martin Huth Ruwald; Brian Olshansky
Journal:  Intern Emerg Med       Date:  2018-03-26       Impact factor: 3.397

Review 2.  Cardiac and Vascular Causes of Syncope and Atherosclerosis.

Authors:  Rose Mary Ferreira Lisboa da Silva; Josep Brugada
Journal:  Curr Cardiol Rep       Date:  2022-08-01       Impact factor: 3.955

3.  Personalized risk stratification through attribute matching for clinical decision making in clinical conditions with aspecific symptoms: The example of syncope.

Authors:  Monica Solbiati; James V Quinn; Franca Dipaola; Piergiorgio Duca; Raffaello Furlan; Nicola Montano; Matthew J Reed; Robert S Sheldon; Benjamin C Sun; Andrea Ungar; Giovanni Casazza; Giorgio Costantino
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2020-03-18       Impact factor: 3.240

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.