Key result
Calf volume changes during venous congestion did not differ between symptomatic and asymptomatic patients, suggesting excessive venous pooling does not predict a positive head-up tilt test.
Why the study?
Does the haemodynamic response to peripheral venous congestion differ between symptomatic and asymptomatic patients with unexplained recurrent syncope during a head-up tilt test?
Observational (n=60)
Does the haemodynamic response to peripheral venous congestion differ between symptomatic and asymptomatic patients with unexplained recurrent syncope during a head-up tilt test?
Absolute Event Rate: 4.8% vs 4.5%
p-value: p=not significant
Excessive venous pooling does not appear to contribute to a positive head-up tilt test outcome in unexplained syncope, whereas impaired adjustment of peripheral resistance may play a role.
Does not support venous pooling assessment in syncope evaluation; leaves open impaired peripheral resistance adjustment as a mechanism in tilt-positive cases.
In patients with recurrent unexplained syncope, exaggerated peripheral venous pooling and impaired circulatory adjustment is thought to contribute to the outcome of a head-up tilt (HUT) test. The present study investigated the role of leg volume changes during venous congestion in the haemodynamic response of patients with recurrent unexplained syncope and the ability to predict the outcome of a HUT test. Changes in calf volume (strain gauge plethysmography), heart rate and arterial blood pressure were recorded in 60 patients with history of unexplained syncope (without postural tachycardia symptom) during venous congestion provoked by pneumatic thigh cuffs while supine at rest and during the initial 10 min of a 45 min 70 degrees HUT test. Twenty-seven patients [age (mean+/-S.D.), 39+/-16 years] exhibited symptoms [HUT(+)] and 33 patients (45+/-14 years) were asymptomatic [HUT(-)]. During venous congestion, mean+/-S.E.M. calf volume increased in both groups [HUT(-), 4.5+/-0.2; HUT(+), 4.8+/-0.4 ml x 100 ml(-1), not significant), but significantly less during head-upright tilt [HUT(-), 3.3+/-0.2, P <0.01; HUT(+), 2.6+/-0.3 ml x 100 ml(-1), P <0.001] without differences between the groups. During venous congestion, arterial pressure increased significantly in asymptomatic HUT(-) patients, but not in the HUT(+) patients. Calf volume changes did not correlate with a symptomatic outcome to a 70 degrees HUT. The lack of exaggerated venous pooling during venous congestion and the inability of calf volume changes to predict a positive HUT suggest that excessive venous pooling does not contribute to the outcome of HUT. Attenuated changes in arterial pressure during venous congestion while supine suggest impaired adjustment of peripheral resistance to leg venous occlusion.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bellard et al. (2003) conducted an observational in unexplained recurrent syncope (n=60). Symptomatic response to head-up tilt test (HUT+) vs. Asymptomatic response (HUT-) was evaluated on Calf volume increase during venous congestion (ml x 100 ml-1) (p=not significant). Calf volume changes during venous congestion did not differ between symptomatic and asymptomatic patients, suggesting excessive venous pooling does not predict a positive head-up tilt test.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: