Evaluation and Management of Syncope

Context: Syncope is a commonly encountered by primary care physicians and cardiologists. Etiology is frequently not apparent, and patients may undergo unnecessary tests. Treatment must be tailored to the likely etiology. Complexities of diagnosis and treatment often warrant referral to a specialist. Objective: To highlight the evolving recommendations for managing syncope in a clinically and cost effective manner. Evidence Acquisition: An electronic literature search was undertaken of the Medline database from January 1996 to April 2006, using the Medical Subject Heading syncope, defibrillators, pacemakers, echocardiogram, cardiomyopathy, long QT syndrome, Arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia, and Brugada syndrome. Abstracts and titles were reviewed to identify English-language trials. Bibliographies from the references as well as scientific statements from the Heart Rhythm Society, American Heart Association, and American College of Cardiology were reviewed. Evidence Synthesis: A methodical approach to syncope can improve diagnosis, limit testing, and identify patients at risk of fatal outcome. A thorough history, physical exam and electrocardiogram are critical to the initial diagnosis. Presence of heart disease determines the extent of work-up and treatment. A trans-thoracic echocardiogram should be performed in patients with an unclear diagnosis and a positive cardiac history or an abnormal ECG. Ventricular arrhythmias are the most common cause of syncope in patients with structural heart disease. Patients with an ejection fraction less than 30 percent should receive an implantable defibrillator with few exceptions. An electrophysiology study may assist risk stratification in syncopal patients with borderline ventricular function. In patients without structural heart disease, the presence of a well defined arrhythmia syndrome consistent with a genetically determined risk of sudden death must be sought. The 12-lead electrocardiogram, family history and clinical presentation will identify most high-risk patients. Patients without structural heart disease can often be managed conservatively with well defined strategies for preventing neurocardiogenic syncope. Conclusions: Managing syncope requires a methodical approach. An understanding of the limitations of the diagnostic tools and treatments is important. Lethal causes of syncope make it imperative to recognize the appropriate timing of refer- ring patients to specialists.