Literature DB >> 30116447

Utilization of Echocardiogram, Carotid Ultrasound, and Cranial Imaging in the Inpatient Investigation of Syncope: Its Impact on the Diagnosis and the Patient's Length of Hospitalization.

Glenmore Lasam1,2, Jaimin Dudhia2, Sharen Anghel2, Jeffrey Brensilver2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Although guidelines suggest that the best strategy for evaluating syncope is clinical history and physical examination, the inappropriate utilization of diagnostic imaging is common.
METHODS: A single center retrospective analysis conducted in adult patients admitted for evaluation and management of syncope for a period of 12 months. Charts were reviewed to abstract demographic data, admitting and discharge diagnosis, diagnostic investigatory tests including imaging modalities (echocardiogram, carotid ultrasound, and cranial computed tomography (CT)) ordered, subspecialty consultation requested, treatment rendered and hospital length of stay (LOS).
RESULTS: A total of 109 patients were admitted for syncope, mean age was 68.74 ± 21.04 years and 39.44% were men. Echocardiogram, carotid ultrasound, and cranial CT were ordered in 69.72%, 33.02%, and 76.14% respectively. The mean hospital LOS was 2.6 days. Patients with no imaging test, one imaging test, two imaging tests, and three imaging tests ordered have an average hospital LOS of 2.22 days, 2.44 days, 2.58 days, and 3.07 days respectively. The number of imaging test and its relation to the admitting (Chi-square (chi-sq) P = 0.4165, nominal logistic regression (LR) P = 0.939) and discharge (chi-sq P = 0.1507, nominal LR P = 0.782) diagnosis as well as the LOS in relation to the number of imaging test ordered (analysis of variance (ANOVA) P = 0.368, Kruskal Wallis (KW) P = 0.352) were not statistically significant although there was a trend of prolonged hospital LOS the more imaging diagnostic test had been ordered. Syncope was the admitting and discharge diagnosis in 89.9% and 91.74% respectively.
CONCLUSIONS: Choosing the appropriate diagnostic tests as dictated by the patient's clinical manifestation and utilizing less expensive test would be appropriate and cost-effective approach in appraising patients with syncope.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Imaging; Length of hospitalization; Syncope

Year:  2018        PMID: 30116447      PMCID: PMC6089464          DOI: 10.14740/cr751w

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cardiol Res        ISSN: 1923-2829


Introduction

Syncope is a sudden temporary loss of consciousness and associated with inability to support postural tone with quick spontaneous recovery that is generally the result of cerebral hypoperfusion [1]. It is a common condition, which accounts 1% to 2% of emergency department visit [2]. The US Department of Human and Health Services’ Healthcare Cost and Utilization Project reported a $ 3.7 billion annual aggregate charge for syncope with a mean cost of 6,647 per admission [3]. Thirty to forty percent of syncope patients are admitted for additional test which translated to an annual expenditure of $ 2.4 billion as documented in the USA Medicare Database [4]; and much of these costs are directly linked to the diagnostic testing implemented to detect the causes of syncope [5]. Endeavors to diminish nonessential and costly admission have included clinical decision tools regarding the decision to admit, but have not determined the benefit and yield of testing in syncope [6]. The objective of the study is to determine the utilization of echocardiogram, carotid ultrasound, and cranial computed tomography (CT) and its impact on the admitting and discharge diagnosis in patients admitted for syncope as well as to establish if the length of their hospital stay had been affected by these investigatory imaging tests.

Materials and Methods

A single center retrospective analysis was conducted in adult patients admitted for evaluation and management of syncope at Atlantic Health System’s (AHS) Overlook Medical Center from January 2015 to December 2015. Charts were reviewed to abstract demographic data, admitting and discharge diagnosis, diagnostic investigatory test ordered, subspecialty consultation requested, and treatment rendered. Imaging modalities ordered that included echocardiogram, carotid ultrasound, and cranial CT were also abstracted as well as the hospital LOS. This study was approved by the AHS Institutional Review Board and was conducted according to the institutional guidelines and standards.

Statistical analysis

Values are expressed as mean ± standard deviation (SD). Chi-square (chi-sq) and nominal logistic regression (nominal LR) were utilized to see the association of number of imaging test ordered in relation to the admitting and discharge diagnosis. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) and Kruskal Wallis (KW) were utilized to compare the mean and median data distribution respectively to determine the association of number of imaging test ordered in relation to hospital LOS. A statistically significant level was set at 0.05.

Results

A total of 109 patients were admitted for syncope from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2015. The mean age was 68.74 ± 21.04 years, 60.55% were women while 39.44% were men. Whites comprised 66.05% of the admissions followed by Blacks (16.51%), Hispanics (11.92%), and Asians (3.66%). Hypertension (63.30%), hyperlipidemia (32.11%), and coronary artery disease (20.18%) were the leading comorbidities. Statin (33.94%), antiplatelet (33.94%), and beta blocker (33.02%) comprised the most common medications taken (Table 1). Orthostatic vital signs were done in 41.28% of patients (51.11% were positive). Telemetry and electrocardiogram (ECG) were ordered in 97.24% of patients in which normal sinus rhythm has been documented in 80.18% and 68.86% respectively. Also, electroencephalogram was ordered in 44.95% in which 95.91% have been negative. Nuclear stress test and tilt table test were ordered in 3.66% (100% negative) and 2.75% (33.33% positive) of patients respectively (Table 2). Echocardiogram, carotid ultrasound, and cranial CT were ordered in 69.72%, 33.02%, and 76.14% respectively. Cranial imaging revealed normal results in 67.46%, microvascular disease in 20.48%, and chronic basal ganglia infarct in 6.02% of patients. Carotid ultrasound showed normal results in 86.11% of patients. Echocardiogram documented a mean EF of 56.81±7.82%, diastolic dysfunction in 46.68%, concentric hypertrophy in 35.52%, and normal results in 18.42% of patients (Table 3). Intravenous fluid had been administered in 41 (37.61%) patients while no intravenous fluid had been ordered in 68 (62.38%) of patients. Cardiology (54.12%), epilepsy (31.19%), neurology (26.60%) and physiatry (5.50%) consults were requested for these patients. Discharge medications were the same from home medications in 74.31%, was revised in 22.01%, and no home medications were ordered in 3.66% of patients. The mean hospital length of stay (LOS) was 2.6 days. Patients with no imaging test, one imaging test, two imaging tests, and three imaging tests ordered have an average hospital LOS of 2.22 days, 2.44 days, 2.58 days, and 3.07 days respectively (Table 4 and Figure 1). The number of imaging test ordered in association to LOS (ANOVA P = 0.368, KW P = 0.352) as well as the number of imaging test ordered and its relation to the admitting (chi-sq P = 0.4165, nominal LR P = 0.939) and discharge (chi-sq P = 0.1507, nominal LR P = 0.782) diagnosis were not statistically significant although there was a trend of prolonged hospital LOS the more imaging diagnostic test had been ordered (Tables 5-7). Syncope was the admitting and discharge diagnosis in 89.9% and 91.74% respectively (Table 8). Eighty seven percent of the patients were discharged home.
Table 1

Baseline Characteristics, Comorbidities, and Home Medications of Patients Admitted for Syncope

N = 109(%)
Age68.74 ± 21.04 years
Male43 (39.44%)
Female66 (60.55%)
Race
  White72 (66.05%)
  Black18 (16.51%)
  Hispanic13 (11.92%)
  Asian4 (3.66%)
  Other2 (1.83%)
Common Comorbidities
  Hypertension69 (63.30%)
  Hyperlipidemia35 (32.11%)
  Coronary artery disease22 (20.18%)
  Hypothyroidism18 (16.82%)
  Diabetes mellitus17 (15.59%)
  Atrial fibrillation15 (16.51%)
  Anemia15 (13.76%)
  Cerebrovascular accident11 (10.09%)
  Chronic kidney disease11 (10.09%)
  Dementia11 (10.09%)
Common Medications
  Statin37 (33.94%)
  Antiplatelet37 (33.94%)
  Beta blocker36 (33.02%)
  Calcium channel blocker32 (29.35%)
  Multivitamins23 (21.10%)
  Angiotensin converting enzyme inhibitor22 (20.18%)
  Selective serotonin reuptake inhibitor20 (18.34%)
  Thyroid hormone19 (17.43%)
  Angiotensin receptor block15 (13.76%)
  Anticonvulsant13 (11.92%)
Table 2

Investigatory Studies Ordered and Performed for Patients Admitted for Syncope and Its Results

N = 109(%)
Orthostatic vital signs
  Done45 (41.28%)
    Positive23 (51.11%)
  Not done64 (58.71%)
Telemetry
  Ordered106 (97.24%)
    Normal sinus rhythm85 (80.18%)
    Sinus bradycardia14 (13.20%)
    Bundle branch block14 (13.20%)
    First degree atrioventricular block10 (9.43%)
    Atrial fibrillation/flutter7 (6.60%)
    Premature atrial contraction3 (2.83%)
    Paced rhythm3 (2.83%)
    Nonsustained ventricular tachycardia3 (2.83%)
    Supraventricular tachycardia1 (0.94%)
    Sinus arrhythmia1 (0.94%)
    Sinus tachycardia1 (0.94%)
  Not ordered3 (2.83%)
Electrocardiogram
  Ordered106 (97.24%)
    Normal sinus rhythm73 (68.86%)
    Sinus bradycardia13 (12.26%)
    Right bundle branch block13 (12.26%)
    Nonspecific ST wave changes10 (9.43%)
    Left ventricular hypertrophy10 (9.43%)
    First degree atrioventricular block8 (7.54%)
    Premature atrial contraction7 (6.60%)
    Atrial fibrillation/flutter7 (6.60%)
    Sinus tachycardia6 (5.66%)
    Premature ventricular contraction6 (5.66%)
    Sinus arrhythmia5 (4.71%)
    Poor R wave progression5 (4.71%)
    Left bundle branch block4 (3.77%)
    Left anterior fascicular block4 (3.77%)
    Intraventricular conduction delay4 (3.77%)
    Lateral wall ischemia3 (2.83%)
    Left atrial enlargement2 (1.88%)
    Anterolateral wall ischemia1 (0.94%)
    Old inferior wall myocardial infarction1 (0.94%)
    Prolonged QT interval1 (0.94%)
  Not ordered3 (2.83%)
Electroencephalogram
  Ordered49 (44.95%)
    Negative47(95.91%)
    Positive2 (4.08%)
      Primary generalized epilepsy1 (50%)
      Left temporal region epilepsy1 (50%)
Nuclear stress test
  Ordered4 (3.66%)
    Positive0 (0%)
    Negative4 (100%)
Tilt table test
  Ordered3 (2.75%)
    Positive1 (33.33%)
    Negative2 (66.66%)
Intracardiac loop recorder placement
  Ordered5(4.58%)
Pacemaker interrogation
  Ordered2 (1.83%)
Electrophysiological studies
  Ordered0 (0%)
Table 3

Imaging Studies Ordered and Performed for Patients Admitted for Syncope and Its Results

N = 109(%)
Cranial computed tomography
  Ordered83 (76.14%)
    Normal56 (67.46%)
    Microvascular disease17 (20.48%)
    Chronic basal ganglia infarct5 (6.02%)
    Hematoma2 (2.40%)
    Meningioma2 (2.40%)
    Chronic ischemic changes1 (1.20%)
    Central cortical atrophy1 (1.20%)
    Parenchymal volume loss1 (1.20%)
    Calcification1 (1.20%)
    Nonspecific white matter changes1 (1.20%)
    Small intraparenchymal hemorrhage1 (1.20%)
    Basal ganglia neuroepithelial cyst1 (1.20%)
    Cavernous malformation1 (1.20%)
    Hemorrhagic contusion1 (1.20%)
    Acute Maxillary sinusitis1 (1.20%)
  Not ordered26 (23.85%)
Carotid ultrasound
  Ordered36 (33.02%)
    Normal31 (86.11%)
    Proximal ICA bilateral stenosis (60-79%)1 (2.77%)
    Proximal ICA bilateral stenosis (40-59%)1 (2.77%)
    Right ICA stenosis (80-89%)1 (2.77%)
    Bilateral stenosis ICA (40-59%)1 (2.77%)
    Left ICA mild to moderate plaque1 (2.77%)
  Not ordered73 (66.97%)
Echocardiogram
  Ordered76 (69.72%)
    Diastolic dysfunction37 (46.68%)
    Concentric hypertrophy27 (35.52%)
    Normal14 (18.42%)
    Mild mitral regurgitation12 (15.78%)
    Mild tricuspid regurgitation9 (11.84%)
    Mitral annulus calcification8 (10.52%)
    Moderate to severe mitral regurgitation8 (10.52%)
    Mild Aortic regurgitation5 (6.57%)
    Moderate aortic regurgitation5 (6.57%)
    Moderate aortic stenosis5 (6.57%)
    Moderate tricuspid regurgitation5 (6.57%)
    Mild aortic stenosis4 (5.26%)
    Mild pulmonary hypertension4 (5.26%)
    Mild left ventricular hypertrophy4 (5.26%)
    Mild bilateral atrial enlargement4 (5.26%)
    Moderate pulmonary hypertension2 (2.63%)
    Severe right atrial enlargement2 (2.63%)
    Mild to moderate global hypokinesis2 (2.63%)
    Bioprosthetic valve2 (2.63%)
    Severe tricuspid regurgitation1 (1.31%)
    Speckled pattern1 (1.31%)
    Severe pulmonary hypertension1 (1.31%)
    Mild pericardial effusion1 (1.31%)
    Mild mitral stenosis1 (1.31%)
    Severe aortic stenosis1 (1.31%)
    Mild asymmetric hypertrophy1 (1.31%)
    Basal septum hypokinesis1 (1.31%)
    Mild aortic root dilation1 (1.31%)
    Mild basal septal hypertrophy1 (1.31%)
    Primum atrial septal defect1 (1.31%)
    Paramembranous ventricular septal defect1 (1.31%)
    Endocardial cushion defect1 (1.31%)
  Not ordered33 (30.27%)

ICA: internal carotid artery.

Table 4

Number of Imaging Test Ordered for Patients Admitted for Syncope and Its Impact on the Hospital Length of Stay

N (%)Length of stay in days
No imaging test ordered9 (8.25%)2.22
One imaging test ordered27 (24.77%)2.44
Two imaging tests ordered46 (42.20%)2.58
Three imaging tests ordered27 (24.77%)3.07
Figure 1

Interval plot of hospital length of stay (LOS) in correlation with number of imaging test ordered. LOS: length of stay. The pooled standard deviation was used to calculate the intervals.

Table 5

Number of Imaging Test Ordered (Echocardiogram, Carotid Ultrasound, and Cranial Computed Tomography) and Its Association to Patient’s Hospital Length of Stay

Hospital length of stay0 test (N = 9)1 test (N = 27)2 tests (N = 46)3 tests (N = 27)P (ANOVA)P (KW)
Mean ± SD2.222 ± 1.4812.444 ± 1.3962.587 ± 1.6273.074 ± 1.6390.368
Median(minimum - maximum)1 (1 - 4)2 (1 - 7)2 (1 - 6)3 (1 - 7)0.352
Table 6

Number of Imaging Test Ordered (Echocardiogram, Carotid Ultrasound, and Cranial Computed Tomography) and Its Influence on Admitting Diagnosis

Number of imaging test orderedSyncopeVasovagal syncopeSyncope vs. seizureTotal
07 (8.092)1 (0.330)1 (0.578)9
122 (24.275)2 (0.991)3 (1.734)27
243 (41.358)1 (1.688)2 (2.954)46
326 (24.275)0 (0.991)1 (1.734)27
Total9847109

Chi-square P value = 0.4165, nominal logistic regression P value = 0.939.

Table 7

Number of Imaging Test Ordered (Echocardiogram, Carotid Ultrasound, and Cranial Computed Tomography) and Its Influence on Discharge Diagnosis

Number of imaging test orderedSyncopeVasovagal syncopeNeurocardiogenic syncopeSyncope with seizureSyncope vs. seizureTotal
08 (8.2569)0 (0.3303)0 (0.1651)0 (0.1651)1 (0.0826)9
123 (24.770)2 (0.9908)1 (0.4954)1 (0.4954)0(0.2477)27
243 (42.2018)2 (1.6881)0 (0.8440)1 (0.8440)0 (0.4220)46
326 (24.7706)0 (0.9908)1 (0.4954)0 (0.4954)0 (0.2477)27
Total1004221109

Chi-square P value = 0.1507; nominal logistic regression P value = 0.782.

Table 8

Admitting and Discharge Diagnosis of Patients Admitted for Syncope

N = 109 (%)
Admitting diagnosis
  Syncope98 (89.90%)
  Syncope with fall7 (6.42%)
  Syncope vs. Seizure4 (3.66%)
Discharge diagnosis
  Syncope100 (91.74%)
  Vasovagal syncope4 (3.66%)
  Neurocardiogenic syncope2 (1.83%)
  Syncope with seizure2 (1.83%)
  Syncope vs. Seizure1 (0.91%)
ICA: internal carotid artery. Interval plot of hospital length of stay (LOS) in correlation with number of imaging test ordered. LOS: length of stay. The pooled standard deviation was used to calculate the intervals. Chi-square P value = 0.4165, nominal logistic regression P value = 0.939. Chi-square P value = 0.1507; nominal logistic regression P value = 0.782.

Discussion

The recommended strategy for determining the etiology of syncope is clinical evaluation with history, physical examination, and orthostatic blood pressure (BP) measurement. When the initial cause remains unclear, further investigation is appropriate. Several algorithms have been developed by specialty organizations to determine the cause of syncope but no single protocol had established its cause which translates to unnecessary utilization of test including imaging modalities to evaluate syncope. The 2018 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) guidelines for the diagnosis and management of syncope recommended that the initial evaluation of the patient presenting with transient loss of consciousness should include careful history, physical examination (including orthostatic BP measurement), and ECG which can establish the etiology of syncope in most patients, thus, enabling no further evaluation needed and instead institute planned treatment when the diagnosis is nearly evident or highly possible [7]. Also, the 2017 American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association/Heart Rhythm Society (ACC/AHA/HRS) guideline for the evaluation and management of patients with syncope recommended detailed history, physical examination (including orthostatic BP measurement), and ECG in the initial evaluation of syncope [1]. Initial evaluation is able to define the cause of syncope in 23-50% of patients [8, 9]. In some circumstances, the initial evaluation does not unravel a definite diagnosis but rather suggests other etiologies which necessitate additional diagnostic testing that assess the risk of major cardiovascular events or sudden cardiac death. Investigatory modalities including cardiac enzymes tests, CT scans, echocardiography, carotid ultrasonography, and electroencephalography all affected diagnosis or management in less than 5% of cases and helped determine the etiology of syncope less than 2% of the time; however, postural BP recording, performed in only 38% of episodes, had the highest yield with respect to affecting diagnosis (18% - 26%) or management (25% - 30%) and determining etiology of the syncopal episode (15% - 21%) [10]. Cardiac imaging performed routinely is not beneficial in the appraisal of patients with syncope unless a cardiac cause is uncertain based on findings on initial evaluation that includes history, physical examination, or ECG [11, 12]. Echocardiography plays an essential function in risk stratification and serves to validate or contradict the uncertainties for the patients with suspected heart disease [13]; however, it establishes the etiology of syncope in very few patients when no further tests are required [14]. A syncope retrospective study documented that echocardiography proposed a cardiac syncope diagnosis in 48% of study patients [12]. On the other hand in a prospective syncope study, echocardiography suggested critical valvular disease or compromised left ventricular systolic function as the etiology of syncopal event in 22% of patients [6]. Albeit echocardiography may never be capable to determine the proximate syncopal etiology, it contributes knowledge for a conceivable disease burden linked to outcome. Cranial MRI and CT are not advocated in the conventional evaluation of patients with syncope in the lack of focal neurological deficit or head trauma that aid additional investigation [15, 16]. A retrospective study that obtained cranial CT scan in patients with syncope provided diagnosis in 2% of patients [17] while a prospective study that utilized cranial CT scan in patients with syncope yielded abnormal results in 5% of patients [18]. Also, imaging of the carotid is not endorsed as well in the customary syncope evaluation in the dearth of focal neurological findings that substantiate more investigation since this approach determined a diagnosis only in 0.5% of patients [11, 15, 16, 19, 20]. In our study, cranial CT scan, echocardiography, carotid ultrasonography all affected the diagnosis in 2% of cases, have low diagnostic yield in determining the etiology of syncope, prolonged the hospital LOS, and were costly. A previous study documented an average of 4.7 days LOS for admitted syncope patients [21] while another one documented an average of 3 days which correlated with number of predictors such as age, sex, and comorbidities [22]. Our study determined the utilization of an incremental number of imaging modalities ordered (echocardiography, cranial CT scan, and carotid ultrasound) and its impact on the hospital LOS which showed a trend towards a prolonged course although it was not statistically considerable.

Limitations

This is a small retrospective study and thus the sample size may possibly be a confounding factor to achieve a statistically significant power. There is a demand for extensive clinical trials that determine the diagnostic yield and observance of a systematic application of standardized syncope guideline.

Conclusions

Choosing the appropriate diagnostic tests as dictated by the patient’s clinical manifestation and utilizing less expensive modality would be the appropriate and cost-effective approach in appraising patients with syncope.
  20 in total

1.  Efficacy and safety of midodrine hydrochloride in patients with refractory vasovagal syncope.

Authors:  N Samniah; S Sakaguchi; K G Lurie; D Iskos; D G Benditt
Journal:  Am J Cardiol       Date:  2001-07-01       Impact factor: 2.778

2.  The North American Vasovagal Pacemaker Study (VPS). A randomized trial of permanent cardiac pacing for the prevention of vasovagal syncope.

Authors:  S J Connolly; R Sheldon; R S Roberts; M Gent
Journal:  J Am Coll Cardiol       Date:  1999-01       Impact factor: 24.094

3.  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

4.  The application of a standardized strategy of evaluation in patients with syncope referred to three syncope units.

Authors:  F Croci; M Brignole; P Alboni; C Menozzi; A Raviele; A Del Rosso; M Dinelli; A Solano; N Bottoni; P Donateo
Journal:  Europace       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 5.214

Review 5.  Syncope.

Authors:  Pradyot Saklani; Andrew Krahn; George Klein
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  2013-03-26       Impact factor: 29.690

6.  Epidemiological characteristics and diagnostic approach in patients admitted to the emergency room for transient loss of consciousness: Group for Syncope Study in the Emergency Room (GESINUR) study.

Authors:  Gonzalo Baron-Esquivias; Jesús Martínez-Alday; Alfonso Martín; Angel Moya; Roberto García-Civera; M Paz López-Chicharro; María Martín-Mendez; Carmen del Arco; Pedro Laguna
Journal:  Europace       Date:  2010-03-09       Impact factor: 5.214

7.  2018 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of syncope.

Authors:  Michele Brignole; Angel Moya; Frederik J de Lange; Jean-Claude Deharo; Perry M Elliott; Alessandra Fanciulli; Artur Fedorowski; Raffaello Furlan; Rose Anne Kenny; Alfonso Martín; Vincent Probst; Matthew J Reed; Ciara P Rice; Richard Sutton; Andrea Ungar; J Gert van Dijk
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2018-06-01       Impact factor: 29.983

8.  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

9.  Tilt training for recurrent neurocardiogenic syncope: effectiveness, patient compliance, and scheduling the frequency of training sessions.

Authors:  Ozan Kinay; Mehmet Yazici; Cem Nazli; Gurkan Acar; Omer Gedikli; Ahmet Altinbas; Halil Kahraman; Abdullah Dogan; Mehmet Ozaydin; Nurullah Tuzun; Oktay Ergene
Journal:  Jpn Heart J       Date:  2004-09

10.  The etiology of syncope in patients with negative tilt table and electrophysiological testing.

Authors:  A D Krahn; G J Klein; C Norris; R Yee
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  1995-10-01       Impact factor: 29.690

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.