Cited by 27Cardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic DisordersVestibular and auditory disordersHeart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control

Usefulness of the Calgary Syncope Symptom Score for the diagnosis of vasovagal syncope in the elderly

Open access
Exposito, V., Guzman, J. C., Orava, M., Armaganijan, L., Morillo, C. A.·2013·Europace

Abstract

AIMS: The Calgary Syncope Symptom Score (CSSS) has been validated as a simple point score of historical features with high sensitivity and specificity for the diagnosis of vasovagal syncope (VVS) in younger populations without evidence of structural heart disease. Our purpose was to evaluate the performance of the CSSS in an elderly population with suspected VVS. METHODS AND RESULTS: Hundred and eighty patients of ≥60 years of age (mean 73.4 ± 7.8) with suspected clinical diagnosis of VVS were studied. The CSSS (VVS score ≥-2) was calculated in all patients prior to undergoing head-up tilt test (HUT). A standardized HUT protocol with active nitroglycerin phase was used to reproduce syncopal symptoms as gold standard for diagnosis of VVS. Hundred and forty patients had positive HUT response. Eighty-three patients (42.3%) had CSSS ≥-2 suggesting a diagnosis of VVS. The Calgary Syncope Symptom Score sensitivity was 0.51 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.42-0.59] and specificity 0.73 (95% CI 0.52-0.85) with positive predictive value and negative predictive value of 0.87 (95% CI 0.77-0.93) and 0.30 (95% CI 0.21-0.40), respectively. One hundred (55.6%) patients had previous history of mild cardiovascular disease documented during assessment prior to HUT. In this population sensitivity and specificity was markedly reduced: 0.13 (95% CI 0.05-0.29) and 0.70 (95% CI 0.57-0.80), respectively. CONCLUSION: The CSSS has a lower sensitivity and specificity in an elderly population presenting with syncope compared to previously validated data in young adults, particularly in elderly patients with previous history of mild cardiovascular disease. A modified CSSS may be needed to improve specificity and sensitivity in this population.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1093/europace/eut042

Cites

45 of 45 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Validation attempts for vasovagal syncope diagnostic scores have generally not used patients as rigorously defined as those in the derivation studies.

    “Generally, attempts at validation have not been conducted with patients as rigorously defined as in the derivation studies.94,95”

    From 2015 Heart Rhythm Society Expert Consensus Statement on the Diagnosis and Treatment of Postural Tachycardia Syndrome, Inappropriate Sinus Tachycardia, and Vasovagal Syncope (2015) · cites this paper as [95]

    The Discussion (page not provided) says one validation study included patients with other causes of loss of consciousness, which it identifies as a methodological issue. It also contrasts this study’s elderly patients with the original score’s population without structural heart disease. These examples support the concern, but the paper does not establish that validation attempts generally used less rigorously defined patients. (LLM, conf=0.84)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. [29]29. Morillo CA. Evidence-based common sense: the role of clinical history for the diagnosis of vasovagal syncope. Eur Heart J 2006;27:253 -4.
  2. [31]31. Keim MW, Momper R, Heck KF, Braun B, Hust MH. Neurocardiogenic syn- cope's in patients with implanted pacemakers. Dtsch Med Wochenschr 1999; 124:953-7.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Exposito, V., Guzman, J. C., Orava, M., Armaganijan, L., & Morillo, C. A.
Affiliations
McMaster University (CA)
Corresponding author
Morillo, C. A.
Venue
Europace
Published
2013-03-10
Volume
15
Issue
8
Pages
1210-1214
ISSN
  • 1099-5129 (ISSN-L)
  • 1532-2092
OpenAlex
W2111030179
Cited by
27
References
45
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 2 · 2020: 2 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 1
FWCI
3.29
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • EP Europace (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Cardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic Disorders
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Neurology › Vestibular and auditory disorders
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Heart Rate Variability and Autonomic Control
Keywords
vasovagal syncope, syncope, elderly patients, head-up tilt, diagnostic accuracy, sensitivity and specificity, cardiovascular disease
MeSH terms
Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Female, Nitroglycerin, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Ontario, Risk Factors, Sensitivity and Specificity, Severity of Illness Index, Vasodilator Agents, Reproducibility of Results, Prevalence, Tilt-Table Test, Syncope, Vasovagal

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