Potential Role of Biomarkers in the Management of Syncope


Study objective: Syncope is one of the most common presentation of patients seen in emergency departments (ED). Risk assessment of syncope is challenging. The San Francisco Syncope Rule is the most widely used risk assessment, but has moderate accuracy. The aim of our study was to investigate blood biomarkers as prognostic factors for adverse outcome. Methods: In this observational study we included consecutive adults presenting with syncope to our ED. Management decisions were left to the discretion of the treating physicians. Patients were monitored for adverse events until discharge and underwent a phone interview 30 days after enrolment. Adverse outcome was defined as recurrent syncope, rehospitalization and death within 30 days. Results: We included 132 adult patients of whom 19 (14%) had an adverse event (recurrent syncope = 3, rehospitalisation = 12, death = 4). No difference in the San Francisco Syncope Rule was found in patients with and without adverse events (SFSR ≥ 1: 37% vs. 39%, p = 0.877). Median levels of ProADM (1.23 vs. 0.81 nmol/l; p = 0.006) and NT-proBNP (454 vs 134ng/l; p = 0.035) were higher and median levels for cholesterol (3.68 vs 4.57 mmol/l; p = 0.008) and prealbumin (0.19 vs0.26 g/l; p = 0.005) were lower in patients with adverse events. Prealbumin (AUC 0.72) and ProADM (AUC 0.70) had the highest prognostic accuracy. Conclusion: Biomarkers predicted poor outcome and might be helpful in the context of a clinical algorithm for an improved triage of syncope patients in the ED.

Share and Cite:

Arici, B. , Maeder, M. , Schuetz, P. , Muelle, B. and Albrich, W. (2012) Potential Role of Biomarkers in the Management of Syncope. International Journal of Clinical Medicine, 3, 744-750. doi: 10.4236/ijcm.2012.37A131.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.


[1] B. C. Sun, J. A. Emond and C. A. Camargo Jr., “Characteristics and Admission Patterns of Patients Presenting with Syncope to US Emergency Departments, 1992-2000,” Academic Emergency Medicine, Vol. 11, No. 10, 2004, pp. 1029-1034.
[2] E. S. Soteriades, et al., “Incidence and Prognosis of Syncope,” New England Journal of Medicine, Vol. 347, No. 12, 2002, pp. 878-885. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa012407
[3] A. Moya, et al., “Guidelines for the Diagnosis and Management of Syncope (version 2009),” European Heart Journal, Vol. 30, No. 21, 2009, pp. 2631-2671.
[4] A. Bartoletti, et al., “Hospital Admission of Patients Referred to the Emergency Department for Syncope: A Single-Hospital Prospective Study Based on the Application of the European Society of Cardiology Guidelines on Syncope,” European Heart Journal, Vol. 27, No. 1, 2006, pp. 83-88. doi:10.1093/eurheartj/ehi474
[5] M. L. Mendu, et al., “Yield of Diagnostic Tests in Evaluating Syncopal Episodes in Older Patients,” Archives of Internal Medicine, Vol. 169, No. 14, 2009, pp. 1299-1305. doi:10.1001/archinternmed.2009.204
[6] B. C. Sun, J. A. Emond and C. A. Camargo Jr., “Direct Medical Costs of Syncope-Related Hospitalizations in the United States,” American Journal of Cardiology, Vol. 95, No. 5, 2005, pp. 668-671. doi:10.1016/j.amjcard.2004.11.013
[7] T. P. Martin, B. H. Hanusa and W. N. Kapoor, “Risk Stratification of Patients with Syncope,” Annals of Emergency Medicine, Vol. 29, No. 4, 1997, pp. 459-466. doi:10.1016/S0196-0644(97)70217-8
[8] F. Colivicchi, et al., “Development and Prospective Validation of a Risk Stratification System for Patients with Syncope in the Emergency Department: The OESIL Risk Score,” European Heart Journal, Vol. 24, No. 9, 2003, pp. 811-819. doi:10.1016/S0195-668X(02)00827-8
[9] G. Costantino, et al., “Short- and Long-Term Prognosis of Syncope, Risk Factors, and Role of Hospital Admission: Results from the STePS (Short-Term Prognosis of Syncope) Study,” Journal of the American College of Cardiology, Vol. 51, No. 3, 2008, pp. 276-283. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2007.08.059
[10] J. Quinn, et al., “Prospective Validation of the San Francisco Syncope Rule to Predict Patients with Serious Outcomes,” Annals of Emergency Medicine, Vol. 47, No. 5, 2006, pp. 448-454. doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2005.11.019
[11] R. T. Saccilotto, et al., “San Francisco Syncope Rule to Predict Short-Term Serious Outcomes: A Systematic Review,” Canadian Medical Association Journal, Vol. 183, No. 15, 2011, pp. E1116-E1126. doi:10.1503/cmaj.101326
[12] B. C. Sun, et al., “External Validation of the San Francisco Syncope Rule,” Annals of Emergency Medicine, Vol. 49, No. 4, 2007, pp. 420-427. e1-e4.
[13] A. Birnbaum, et al., “Failure to Validate the San Francisco Syncope Rule in an Independent Emergency Department Population,” Annals of Emergency Medicine, Vol. 52, No. 2, 2008, pp. 151-159. doi:10.1016/j.annemergmed.2007.12.007
[14] S. A. Grossman, et al., “Reducing Admissions Utilizing the Boston Syncope Criteria,” Journal of Emergency Medicine, Vol. 42, No. 3, 2012, pp. 345-352. doi:10.1016/j.jemermed.2011.01.021
[15] A. Maisel, et al., “Midregion Prohormone Adrenomedullin and Prognosis in Patients Presenting with Acute Dyspnea: Results from the BACH (Biomarkers in Acute Heart Failure) Trial,” Journal of the American College of Cardiology, Vol. 58, No. 10, 2011, pp. 1057-1067.
[16] O. S. Dhillon, et al., “Prognostic Value of Mid-Regional Pro-Adrenomedullin Levels Taken on Admission and Discharge in Non-ST-Elevation Myocardial Infarction: the LAMP (Leicester Acute Myocardial Infarction Peptide) II Study,” Journal of the American College of Cardiology, Vol. 56, No. 2, 2010, pp. 125-133. doi:10.1016/j.jacc.2010.01.060
[17] R. Pfister, et al., “NT-Pro-BNP for Diagnostic and Prognostic Evaluation in Patients Hospitalized for Syncope,” International Journal of Cardiology, Vol. 155, No. 2, 2012, pp. 268-272. doi:10.1016/j.ijcard.2010.10.013
[18] B. C. Sun, et al., “Predictors of 30-Day Serious Events in Older Patients with Syncope,” Annals of Emergency Medicine, Vol. 54, No. 6, 2009, pp. 769-778. e1-e5.
[19] M. J. Reed, N. L. Mills and C. J. Weir, “Sensitive Troponin Assay Predicts Outcome in Syncope,” Emergency Medicine Journal, Vol. 29, No. 12, 2012, pp. 1001-1003. doi:10.1136/emermed-2012-201332
[20] G. M. Chertow, et al., “Prealbumin, Mortality, and Cause-Specific Hospitalization in Hemodialysis Patients,” Kidney International, Vol. 68, No. 6, 2005, pp. 2794-2800. doi:10.1111/j.1523-1755.2005.00751.x

Copyright © 2023 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc.

Creative Commons License

This work and the related PDF file are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.