Development and prospective validation of a risk stratification system for patients with syncope in the emergency department: the OESIL risk score
Abstract
AIMS: Aim of the present study was the development and the subsequent validation of a simple risk classification system for patients presenting with syncope to the emergency departments. METHODS AND RESULTS: A group of 270 consecutive patients (145 females, mean age 59.5 years) presenting with syncope to the emergency departments of six community hospitals of the Lazio region of Italy was used as a derivation cohort for the development of the risk classification system. Data from the baseline clinical history, physical examination and electrocardiogram were used to identify independent predictors of total mortality within the first 12 months after the initial evaluation. Multivariate analysis allowed the recognition of the following predictors of mortality: (1) age >65 years; (2) cardiovascular disease in clinical history; (3) syncope without prodromes; and (4) abnormal electrocardiogram. The OESIL (Osservatorio Epidemiologico sulla Sincope nel Lazio) score was calculated by the simple arithmetic sum of the number of predictors present in every single patient. Mortality increased significantly as the score increased in the derivation cohort (0% for a score of 0, 0.8% for 1 point; 19.6% for 2 points; 34.7% for 3 points; 57.1% for 4 points; p<0,0001 for trend). A similar pattern of increasing mortality with increasing score was prospectively confirmed in a second validation cohort of 328 consecutive patients (178 females; mean age, 57.5 years). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical and electrocardiographic data available at presentation to the emergency department can be used for the risk stratification of patients with syncope. The OESIL risk score may represent a simple prognostication tool that could be usefully employed for the triage and management of patients with syncope in emergency departments.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Structural heart disease and primary electrical disease are major risk factors for sudden cardiac death and overall mortality in patients with syncope.
“Structural heart disease 25-27,31,35,36,45 and primary electrical disease 46 are major risk factors for sudden cardiac death (SCD) and overall mortality in patients with syncope.”
From 2018 ESC Guidelines for the diagnosis and management of syncope (2018) · cites this paper as [35]
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 19 · Cited by 359
- Authors
- Colivicchi, F.
- Affiliations
- Ospedale San Filippo Neri (IT)
- Corresponding author
- Colivicchi, F
- ORCID
- Colivicchi, F
- Venue
- European Heart Journal
- Publisher
- Oxford University Press (OUP)
- Published
- 2003-05
- Volume
- 24
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 811-819
- ISSN
- 0195-668X (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2060847368
- Cited by
- 359
- References
- 19
- Citations by year
- 2026: 7 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 7 · 2023: 14 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 12 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 28 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 36 · 2013: 30 · 2012: 24
- FWCI
- 6.39
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
- Locations
- European Heart Journal (publishedVersion)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- Topics
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Cardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic Disorders
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Cardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
- Health Sciences › Medicine › Emergency Medicine › Emergency and Acute Care Studies
- Keywords
- syncope, risk stratification, mortality prediction, emergency department, prognostic score, electrocardiographic abnormalities, cardiovascular disease, age, triage
- MeSH terms
- Electrocardiography, Emergencies, Emergency Service, Hospital, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Italy, Male, Medical History Taking, Middle Aged, Physical Examination, Risk Factors, Syncope, Cohort Studies, Survival Analysis, Treatment Outcome, Risk Assessment
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review