Key result
The active sitting test produced a significantly smaller maximum heart rate increase compared to the head-up tilt test in POTS patients (30.5 vs 46.2 bpm), but a sitting heart rate increase of ≥22 bpm effectively predicted orthostatic tachycardia with 83.3% sensitivity and 83.9% specificity.
Why the study?
To compare hemodynamic responses between the active sitting test and the passive head-up tilt test in children and adolescents with POTS, hypothesizing that sitting tachycardia is present during sitting.
Does the active sitting test provide a reliable alternative to the head-up tilt test for diagnosing postural tachycardia syndrome in children and adolescents?
Cross-Sectional (n=61)
No
Does the active sitting test provide a reliable alternative to the head-up tilt test for diagnosing postural tachycardia syndrome in children and adolescents?
Absolute Event Rate: 30.5% vs 46.2%
p-value: p=<0.001
The active sitting test is a well-tolerated and reasonable alternative to the head-up tilt test for diagnosing postural tachycardia syndrome in children and adolescents, with a heart rate increase of ≥22 bpm providing good diagnostic accuracy.
May offer a bedside screen when tilt cannot be tolerated; leaves open diagnostic adoption pending prospective validation.
Objectives: We aimed to compare the hemodynamic responses to the active sitting test with the passive head-up tilt test (HUTT) in children and adolescents with postural tachycardia syndrome (POTS). We hypothesized that sitting tachycardia was also present in POTS patients during sitting. Materials and methods: We tested 30 POTS patients and 31 control subjects (mean age = 12 years, range = 9–16 years) who underwent both active sitting test and HUTT successively. We measured the heart rate (HR) and blood pressure (BP) during each test. Results: For both POTS patients and control subjects, the HUTT produced significantly larger HR and BP increases from 3 to 10 min of postural change than did the sitting test. Moreover, POTS patients with excessive orthostatic tachycardia during the HUTT also had significantly larger increases in HR at all test intervals during the sitting test than did the control subjects. A maximum increase in HR ≥ 22 bpm within 10 min of the sitting test was likely suggested to predict orthostatic tachycardia, yielding a sensitivity and specificity of 83.3 and 83.9%, respectively. Only six of 30 POTS patients (20%) reached the 40-bpm criterion during the sitting test, and no one complained of sitting intolerance symptoms. Conclusions: We have shown that POTS patients also have sitting tachycardia when changing from a supine position to a sitting position. We believe that the active sitting test is a reasonable alternative maneuver in assessing POTS in population groups that cannot tolerate the standing test or HUTT.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cai et al. (2021) conducted a cross-sectional in Postural Tachycardia Syndrome (POTS) (n=61). Active Sitting Test vs. Head-Up Tilt Test (HUTT) was evaluated on Maximum change in heart rate (ΔHRmax) in POTS patients (p=<0.001). The active sitting test produced a significantly smaller maximum heart rate increase compared to the head-up tilt test in POTS patients (30.5 vs 46.2 bpm), but a sitting heart rate increase of ≥22 bpm effectively predicted orthostatic tachycardia with 83.3% sensitivity and 83.9% specificity.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: