covid
Buscar en
Revista Colombiana de Cardiología
Toda la web
Inicio Revista Colombiana de Cardiología Síncope y escalas de riesgo ¿Qué evidencia se tiene?
Journal Information
Vol. 18. Issue 6.
Pages 330-339 (November - December 2011)
Share
Share
Download PDF
More article options
Vol. 18. Issue 6.
Pages 330-339 (November - December 2011)
Open Access
Síncope y escalas de riesgo ¿Qué evidencia se tiene?
Syncope and risk scales ¿What evidence do we have?
Visits
15068
Guillermo Mora1,2,
Corresponding author
gmorap@unal.edu.co

Correspondencia: Ciudad Universitaria, Facultad de Medicina, Departamento de Medicina Interna Of. 501. Universidad Nacional. Bogotá, DC., Colombia. Tel. y Fax: (57-1) 316 50 00 Ext.: 15011.
, Iván Rendón2, Jorge L. Martínez2, Luis J. Cajas1, Javier Eslava3
1 Departamento de Medicina Interna. Universidad Nacional de Colombia. Bogotá, DC., Colombia
2 Servicio de Cardiología Fundación Santafé de Bogotá. Bogotá, DC., Colombia
3 Instituto de Investigaciones Clínicas. Universidad Nacional de Colombia. Bogotá, DC., Colombia
This item has received

Under a Creative Commons license
Article information
Objetivo

hacer una revisión de las escalas de riesgo existentes para predecir eventos adversos relacionados con síncope.

Metodología

se realizó una búsqueda de artículos en MEDLINE, EMBASE y Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews con el uso de las palabras clave relacionadas con reglas de predicción clínica (algoritmos, análisis multivariado, guías de predicción clínica, escalas, modelos logísticos, valoración de riesgo) y síncope. Adicionalmente, se buscó literatura con el uso de la estrategia de bola de nieve.

Resultados

se encontraron nueve escalas que relacionaron el síncope con predicción de eventos adversos. Se hallaron diferencias en los criterios para definir riesgo, las variables de desenlace, la población estudiada, el uso de una estrategia prospectiva o retrospectiva y el tiempo de seguimiento.

Conclusiones

aunque existen varias escalas para la definición de riesgo con el paciente que ingresa por síncope a urgencias, no hay evidencia de que alguna sea superior a otra, tienen poca validez externa y no se han aplicado en nuestro medio.

Palabras clave:
reglas de predicción clínica
síncope
Objective

perform a review of the existing risk scales to predict adverse events associated with

syncope.

Method

we conducted a search of MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews using the keywords related to clinical prediction rules (algorithms, multivariate analysis, clinical prediction guides, scales, logistic models, risk assessment) and syncope. Additionally, literature was searched using the snowball strategy.

Results

we found nine scales that associated syncope with prediction of adverse events. We found differences in the criteria for defining risk, the outcome variables, the study population, the use of a prospective or retrospective strategy and the follow-up time.

Conclusions

although there are several scales for the definition of risk facing the patient admitted with syncope to the ER, there is no evidence that any one is superior to another, have little external validity and have not been applied in our environment.

Keywords:
clinical prediction rules
syncope
Full text is only aviable in PDF
Bibliografía
[1.]
The Task Force for the Diagnosis and Management of Syncope of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC).
Eur Heart J, 30 (2009), pp. 2631-2671
[2.]
W.N. Kapoor.
Syncope.
N Eng J Med, 343 (2000), pp. 1856-1862
[3.]
D.G. Benditt, J.T. Nguyen.
Syncope therapeutic approaches.
J Am Coll Cardiol, 53 (2009), pp. 1741-1751
[4.]
D.G. Benditt, G.V. Dijk.
Syncope. Curr Probl Cardiol, 29 (2004), pp. 145-229
[5.]
H.E. Gendelman, M. Linzer, M. Gabelman, et al.
Syncope in a general hospital population.
NY State J Med, 83 (1983), pp. 116-165
[6.]
H.H. Wayne.
Syncope: physiological considerations and an analysis of the clinical characteristics in 510 patients.
Am J Med, 30 (1961), pp. 418-438
[7.]
J.J. Blanc, C. L’Her, A. Touiza, et al.
Prospective evaluation and outcome of patients admitted for syncope over a 1 year period.
Eur Heart J, 23 (2002), pp. 815-820
[8.]
R.S. Sheldon, A. Serletis.
Epidemiological aspects of transient loss of consciousness/syncope.
Syncope and Transient Loss of Consciousness. A Multidisciplinary Approach, pp. 8-14
[9.]
D.D. Savage, L. Corwin, D.L. McGee, et al.
Epidemiologic features of isolated syncope: the Framingham Study.
Stroke, 16 (1985), pp. 626-629
[10.]
G. Dermkesian, L.E. Lamb.
Syncope in a population of healthy young adults.
JAMA, 168 (1958), pp. 1200-1207
[11.]
D.J. Driscoll, S.J. Jacobsen, C.J. Porter, P.C. Wollan.
Syncope in children and adolescents.
J Am Coll Cardiol, 29 (1997), pp. 1039-1045
[12.]
K.S. Ganzeboom, N. Colman, J.B. Reitsma, W.K. Shen, W. Wieling.
Prevalence and triggers of syncope in medical students.
Am J Cardiol, 91 (2003), pp. 1006-1008
[13.]
M.L. Koshman, D. Ritchie.
for the Investigators of the Syncope Symptom Study and the Prevention of Syncope Trial. Age of first faint in patients with vasovagal syncope.
J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol, 17 (2006), pp. 49-54
[14.]
A. Serletis, S. Rose, A.G. Sheldon, R.S. Sheldon.
Vasovagal syncope in medical students and their first - degree relatives.
Eur Heart J, 27 (2006), pp. 1965-1970
[15.]
E.S. Soteriades, J.C. Evans, M.G. Larson, et al.
Incidence and prognosis of syncope.
N Engl J Med, 347 (2002), pp. 878-885
[16.]
J.V. Quinn.
Derivation of the San Francisco syncope rule to predict patients with shortterm serious outcomes.
Ann Emerg Med, 43 (2004), pp. 224-232
[17.]
J. Quinn, D. McDemott, I. Stiell, M. Kohn, G. Wells.
Prospective validation of the San Francisco Syncope Rule to predict patients with serious outcomes.
Ann Emerg Med, 47 (2006), pp. 448-454
[18.]
J. Quinn, I. Stiell, D. McDermott, M. Kohn, G. Wells.
The San Francisco syncope rule vs. physician judgment and decision making.
Am J Emerg Med, 23 (2005), pp. 782-786
[19.]
C. Miller, J. Hoekstra.
Prospective validation of the San Francisco syncope rule: will it change practice?.
Ann Emerg Med, 47 (2006), pp. 455-456
[20.]
B. Sun, C. Mangione, G. Merchant, et al.
External validation of the San Francisco syncope rule.
Ann Emerg Med, 49 (2007), pp. 420-427
[21.]
T. Cosgriff, A. Kelly, D. Kerr.
External validation of the San Francisco Syncope rule in the Australian context.
Can J Emerg Med, 9 (2007), pp. 157-161
[22.]
A. Birbaum, D. Esses, P. Bijur, et al.
Failure to validate the San Francisco Syncope rule in an independent emergency department population.
Ann Emerg Med, 52 (2008), pp. 151-159
[23.]
R. Schlandenhaufen, S. Feilinger, M. Pollack, et al.
Application of San Francisco syncope rule in elderly ED patients.
Am J Emerg Med, 26 (2008), pp. 773-778
[24.]
V. Thiruganasambandamoorthy, E. Hess, A. Alreesi, et al.
External validation of the San Francisco syncope rule in the Canadian setting.
Ann Emerg Med, 55 (2010), pp. 464-472
[25.]
M. Reed, D. Newby, A. Coll, et al.
The risk stratification of syncope in the emergency department (ROSE) pilot study: a comparison of existing syncope guidelines.
Emerg Med J, 24 (2007), pp. 270-275
[26.]
F. Dipaola, G. Costantino, F. Perego, et al.
San Francisco syncope rule, osservatorio epidemiológico sulla síncope nel Lazio risk score, and clinical judgment in the assessment of short – term outcome of syncope.
Am J Emerg Med, 28 (2010), pp. 4332-4339
[27.]
J. Quinn, D. McDermott, N. Kramer, et al.
Death after emergency department visits for syncope: how common and can it be predicted?.
Ann Emerg Med, 51 (2008), pp. 585-590
[28.]
T. Martin, B. Hanusa, W. Kapoor.
Risk stratification of patients with syncope.
Ann Emerg Med, 29 (1997), pp. 459-466
[29.]
F. Colivicchi, F. Ammirati, D. Melina, et al.
Development and prospective validation of a risk stratification system for patients with syncope in the emergency department: the OESIL risk score.
Eur Heart J, 24 (2003), pp. 811-819
[30.]
R. Hing, R. Harris.
Relative utility of serum troponin and the OESIL score in syncope.
Emerg Med Austral, 17 (2005), pp. 31-38
[31.]
F. Numeroso, G. Mossini, E. Spaggiari, G. Cervellin.
Syncope in the emergency department of a large northern Italian hospital: incidence, efficacy of a short – stay observation ward and validation of the OESIL risk score.
Emerg Med J, 27 (2010), pp. 653-658
[32.]
A. Del Rosso, A. Ungar, R. Maggi, et al.
Clinical predictors of cardiac syncope at initial evaluation in patients referred urgently to a general hospital: the EGSYS score.
Heart, 94 (2008), pp. 1620-1626
[33.]
F. Sarasin, B. Hanusa, T. Perneger, et al.
A risk score to predict arrhythmias in patients with unexplained syncope.
Acad Emerg Med, 10 (2003), pp. 1312-1317
[34.]
S. Grossman, C. Fischer, L. Lipsitz, et al.
Predicting adverse outcomes in syncope J Emerg Med, 3 (2007), pp. 233-239
[35.]
G. Constantino, F. Perego, F. Dipaola, et al.
Short and long-term prognosis of syncope, risk factors, and role of hospital admission.
J Am Coll Cardiol, 51 (2008), pp. 276-283
[36.]
B. Sun, S. Derose, L. Liang, et al.
Predictors of 30 – day serious events in older patients with syncope.
Ann Emerg Med, 54 (2009), pp. 769-778
[37.]
S.A. Grossman, S. Van Epp, R. Arnold, et al.
The value of cardiac enzymes in elderly patients presenting to the emergency department with syncope.
J Geront A Biol Sci Med Sc, 58 (2003), pp. 1055-1058
[38.]
M.S. Link, E.P. Lauer, M.K. Hamoud, et al.
Low yield of rule – out myocardial infarction protocol in patients presenting with syncope.
Am J Cardiol, 88 (2001), pp. 706-707
[39.]
M. Reed, D. Newby, A. Coull, et al.
The ROSE (risk stratification of syncope in the emergency department) study.
J Am Coll Cardiol, 55 (2010), pp. 713-721
[40.]
L. Serrano, E. Hess, F. Bellolio, et al.
Accuraty and quality of clinical decision rules for syncope in the emergency department: a systematic review and metaanalysis.
Am Emerg Med, 56 (2010), pp. 362-373
[41.]
I.G. Stiell, G.A. Wells.
Methodologic Standards for the Development of Clinical Decision Rules in Emergency Medicine.
Ann Emerg Med, 33 (1999), pp. 437-447
[42.]
T.G. McGinn, G.H. Guyatt, P.C. Wyer, et al.
Users’ guides to the medical literature: xxii: how to use articles about clinical decision rules.
JAMA, 284 (2000), pp. 79-84
Copyright © 2011. Sociedad Colombiana de Cardiología y Cirugía Cardiovascular
Download PDF
Article options