Key result
Tilt-table testing for transient loss of consciousness has a variable diagnostic yield (26-87%) and higher reproducibility for a negative response (85-94%) than a positive response (31-92%).
Why the study?
Does tilt-table testing discriminate between causes of transient loss of consciousness in patients with syncope?
Does tilt-table testing discriminate between causes of transient loss of consciousness in patients with syncope?
Tilt-table testing has a highly variable diagnostic yield and reproducibility depending on the protocol and patient population, complicating its utility as a definitive discriminator for transient loss of consciousness.
Variable yield and reproducibility limit tilt-table testing reliability for distinguishing syncope causes; leaves open its diagnostic role pending standardized protocols.
Syncope accounts for 1–1.5% of emergency room visits and up to 6% of general hospital admissions.1–4 Patients with syncope present with a blackout,5 or transient loss of consciousness (T-LOC), and may present in family practice, cardiology, general medicine, accident and emergency, neurology, geriatric medicine, and psychiatry. Generally, a patient with T-LOC can only give limited details of the event, covering premonition and aftereffects. An eye-witness account is essential for filling in details during T-LOC. However, there are important causes of T-LOC other than syncope, e.g. generalized epilepsy and psychogenic blackouts. When patients present having had T-LOC, clinicians seek a test that will discriminate between these important causes. Is tilt-table testing such a test? Tilt testing is a simple, non-invasive test with a low risk of complications.6 The physiological and pathophysiological effects of orthostatic stress by tilt testing have been known for 60 years.7 In 1986, Kenny et al .8 observed a high rate of tilt-induced syncope, with hypotension and bradycardia, in patients with syncope of previously unknown origin when compared with controls. Subsequently, many reports profiled the use of the test, and guidelines and recommendations emerged.6 However, clinical practice featured a very variable yield from a wide range of protocols, varying in duration and angle of tilt, the use of drug provocation to increase yield, and most importantly, the type of patients studied. Such factors presumably underlie the variable yield of tilt-table testing, which is from 26 to 87%.9 The overall reproducibility of a negative response (85–94%)10–14 is higher than that of an initial positive response (31–92%). The impact of these variations in protocol and patient clinical types, and their effect on the interpretation of a test result for T-LOC discrimination, is considered below. Most studies using tilt …
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Petkar et al. (2008) conducted a review in Syncope or transient loss of consciousness. Tilt-table testing was evaluated. Tilt-table testing for transient loss of consciousness has a variable diagnostic yield (26-87%) and higher reproducibility for a negative response (85-94%) than a positive response (31-92%).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: