Syncope Diagnosis at Referral to a Tertiary Syncope Unit: An in-Depth Analysis of the FAST II

A cross-sectional nationwide survey of guideline based syncope units in the Netherlands: the SU-19 score-a novel validation for best practices

AIMS

We aimed to identify all syncope units (SUs) in the Netherlands and assess the extent to which these SUs fulfil the essential requirements outlined by the consensus statements of the European Heart Rhythm Association and the European Society of Cardiology syncope guidelines. For this, we developed the SU-19 score, a novel guideline based validation tool for best practice.

METHODS AND RESULTS

All outpatient clinics of cardiology, neurology, and internal medicine in the Netherlands were screened for presence of any form of structured specialized syncope care. If present, these were included as SUs and requested to complete a questionnaire regarding syncope care. We assessed all SUs using the SU-19 score regarding structure (3 points), available tests (12 points), and initial evaluation (4 points). Twenty SUs were identified in the Netherlands, both academic (5/20) and non-academic hospitals (15/20), 17/20 reported multidisciplinary involvement during initial evaluation. In 19/20, neurology, cardiology, or both were responsible for the syncope management. Non-physicians were involved performing the head-up tilt test (44%) and initial evaluation (40%). The mean SU-19 score was 18.0 ± 1.1, 45% achieved the maximum score of 19 points. Variations were observed in protocols for active standing test, carotid sinus massage, and head-up tilt test.

CONCLUSION

There is a network of 20 SUs in the Netherlands. Forty-five per cent fully met the SU-19 score (mean 18.0 ± 1.1). Slight variety existed in protocols for autonomic function tests. Neurology and cardiology were mostly involved in syncope management. Non-physicians play an important role in syncope care.

Diagnostic and societal impact of implementing the syncope guidelines of the European Society of Cardiology (SYNERGY study)

BACKGROUND

Syncope management is fraught with unnecessary tests and frequent failure to establish a diagnosis. We evaluated the potential of implementing the 2018 European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Syncope Guidelines regarding diagnostic yield, accuracy and costs.

METHODS

A multicentre pre-post study in five Dutch hospitals comparing two groups of syncope patients visiting the emergency department: one before intervention (usual care; from March 2017 to February 2019) and one afterwards (from October 2017 to September 2019). The intervention consisted of the simultaneous implementation of the ESC Syncope Guidelines with quick referral routes to a syncope unit when indicated. The primary objective was to compare diagnostic accuracy using logistic regression analysis accounting for the study site. Secondary outcome measures included diagnostic yield, syncope-related healthcare and societal costs. One-year follow-up data were used to define a gold standard reference diagnosis by applying ESC criteria or, if not possible, evaluation by an expert committee. We determined the accuracy by comparing the treating physician's diagnosis with the reference diagnosis.

RESULTS

We included 521 patients (usual care, n = 275; syncope guidelines intervention, n = 246). The syncope guidelines intervention resulted in a higher diagnostic accuracy in the syncope guidelines group than in the usual care group (86% vs.69%; risk ratio 1.15; 95% CI 1.07 to 1.23) and a higher diagnostic yield (89% vs. 76%, 95% CI of the difference 6 to 19%). Syncope-related healthcare costs did not differ between the groups, yet the syncope guideline implementation resulted in lower total syncope-related societal costs compared to usual care (saving €908 per patient; 95% CI €34 to €1782).

CONCLUSIONS

ESC Syncope Guidelines implementation in the emergency department with quick referral routes to a syncope unit improved diagnostic yield and accuracy and lowered societal costs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Netherlands Trial Register, NTR6268.

Twenty-five years of research on syncope

Over the last 25 years, the Europace journal has greatly contributed to dissemination of research and knowledge in the field of syncope. More than 400 manuscripts have been published in the journal. They undoubtedly improved our understanding of syncope. This symptom is now clearly differentiated from other forms of transient loss of consciousness. The critical role of vasodepression and/or cardioinhibition as final mechanisms of reflex syncope is emphasized. Current diagnostic approach sharply separates between cardiac and autonomic pathways. Physiologic insights have been translated, through rigorously designed clinical trials, into non-pharmacological or pharmacological interventions and interventional therapies. The following manuscript is intended to give the reader the current state of the art of knowledge of syncope by highlighting landmark contributions of the Europace journal.

Definitive aetiology of unexplained syncope after cardiovascular autonomic tests in a tertiary syncope unit

AIMS

Syncope is a common condition with many possible causes, ranging from benign to life-threatening aetiologies. Establishing a diagnosis can be difficult, and specialized syncope units, using cardiovascular autonomic tests (CATs), including a head-up tilt test, can increase the diagnostic yield. However, up to one-fifth of examined patients have inconclusive CAT results. The aim of the present study was to investigate the predictive value of history, and clinical findings for unexplained syncope after CAT and characterize the group with negative results.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Consecutive syncope patients [n = 2663, 61% women, median age 52 (32-69) years] were evaluated and CAT explained aetiology of syncope in 79% of cases, whereas 21% remained unexplained. Predictors of negative CAT were older age at first syncope (+8% higher odds per 10-year increment, P = 0.042), higher supine heart rate (HR; +12% per 10 b.p.m.; P = 0.003), absence of prodromes (+48%; P < 0.001), hypertension (+45%; P = 0.003), diabetes (+82%; P < 0.001), heart failure (+98%; P = 0.014), and coronary artery disease (+51%; P = 0.027). Compared with vasovagal syncope, patients with negative CAT were older, reported more often the absence of prodromes, and had a higher burden of cardiovascular comorbidities.

CONCLUSION

A cardiovascular autonomic test established the cause of syncope in 79% of patients evaluated in a syncope unit. Syncope without prodromes and cardiovascular comorbidities were significant predictors of failure to reveal an aetiology from assessment by CAT. These are known risk factors for cardiac syncope and patients with inconclusive CAT warrant further investigation.