Temple University Hospital, 3401 N. Broad St, Philadelphia, PA 19123, United States.
Temple University Hospital, 3401 N. Broad St, Philadelphia, PA 19123, United States.
Int J Surg. 2017 Aug;44:210-214. doi: 10.1016/j.ijsu.2017.06.080. Epub 2017 Jul 1.
There is great variation in practice regarding the assessment of trauma patients who present with syncope. The purpose of this study was to determine the yield of screening studies (electrocardiogram, echocardiogram, and carotid duplex) and define characteristics to identify groups that may benefit from these investigations.
We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all trauma patients from 2003 to 2015 who received a carotid duplex as part of a syncope evaluation at our urban Level 1 Trauma Center. Demographics, clinical findings as well as interventions undertaken (ie: placement of defibrillators/pacemakers) as a result of the syncope evaluation were collected. Data analysis was performed with STATA 14 and relationships between comorbidities, positive findings and interventions were assessed. Significance was assumed for p < 0.05.
736 trauma patients were included in the study. The most common mechanism of injury was fall (592, 82%). A history of congestive heart failure (CHF) and/or coronary artery disease (CAD) and age ≥ 65 were significantly associated with abnormal ECG and ECHO findings, but not with severe carotid stenosis. Elevated Injury Severity Scale (ISS) was significantly associated with an abnormal ECHO on both univariate and multivariate analysis. An abnormal ECG was predictive of an abnormal ECHO (p = 0.02). Ten patients (1.4%) underwent placement of a defibrillator and/or pacemaker, all of whom reported having CHF. Only 11 patients (1.7%) had severe carotid stenosis (>70%) requiring intervention.
The screening studies used in a syncope evaluation have low yield in the general trauma population. Carotid duplex should not be routinely performed. Cardiac evaluation should be tailored to individuals with cardiac comorbidities, older age and elevated ISS. An ECG should be used as initial screening in this patient cohort.
对于因晕厥就诊的创伤患者,评估方法差异较大。本研究旨在确定筛查试验(心电图、超声心动图和颈动脉双功能超声)的检出率,并确定可从这些检查中获益的患者特征。
我们对 2003 年至 2015 年期间在我们的城市一级创伤中心因晕厥评估而行颈动脉双功能超声检查的所有创伤患者进行了回顾性队列研究。收集了患者的人口统计学、临床发现以及晕厥评估后的干预措施(即:除颤器/起搏器的放置)。采用 STATA 14 进行数据分析,并评估了并存疾病、阳性发现和干预之间的关系。p 值<0.05 为有统计学意义。
本研究共纳入 736 例创伤患者。最常见的损伤机制是跌倒(592 例,82%)。充血性心力衰竭(CHF)和/或冠状动脉疾病(CAD)病史以及年龄≥65 岁与心电图和超声心动图异常显著相关,但与严重颈动脉狭窄无关。损伤严重程度评分(ISS)升高与超声心动图异常在单因素和多因素分析中均显著相关。心电图异常预测超声心动图异常(p=0.02)。10 例患者(1.4%)行除颤器和/或起搏器植入,均报告有 CHF。仅 11 例患者(1.7%)存在需要干预的严重颈动脉狭窄(>70%)。
晕厥评估中使用的筛查试验在一般创伤人群中的检出率较低。不应常规行颈动脉双功能超声检查。心脏评估应针对伴有心脏并存疾病、年龄较大和 ISS 升高的患者进行。在该患者人群中,心电图应作为初始筛查。