Synkopen – Diagnose und Risikostratifikation

Zusammenfassung

Synkopen sind häufige Einsatzanlässe im Notarztdienst. Die Diagnosestellung ist meist nicht schwierig, da dieses Krankheitsbild klar definiert und gegen andere Entitäten abgegrenzt ist. Die häufigste Differenzialdiagnose ist der Krampfanfall, der durch die Phase der Desorientierung gut von einer Synkope unterschieden werden kann. Die Mehrzahl der Synkopen ist ungefährlich, in einigen Fällen liegen jedoch lebensgefährliche Erkrankungen zugrunde. Diese Unterscheidung ist nicht immer einfach. Die mit Abstand gefährlichsten Synkopen haben rhythmogene und andere kardiogene Ursachen. Die wichtigste apparative Untersuchung ist das 12-Kanal-EKG, das so früh wie möglich geschrieben werden sollte. Dem Notarzt kommt durch seine Feststellungen und Untersuchungen vor Ort sowie durch die Bahnung des weiteren Patientenwegs eine Schlüsselrolle bei Synkopen zu.

Abstract

Syncope is a common cause for EMS calls. Diagnosing syncope is easy in most cases because this condition is well defined and can be separated from other illnesses. The most common differential diagnosis is epileptical seizure. The distinction can be made by a postictal period of disorientation which can't be found after syncope. In most cases syncope is not dangerous but sometimes a life threatening condition can be present. Recognising them can be difficult at times. Syncope by a rhythmogenic or other cardiac origin is the most dangerous one by far. The single most important diagnostic study is a 12-lead-EKG which should be obtained at the earliest time possible. The findings and decisions by EMS physicians may be pivotal for the further course of the patient.

Synkope - Notarztdienst - Risikostratifizierung

syncope - Emergency Medical Service - risk stratification

Literatur

• 1 Savage D D. et al . Epidemiologic features of isolated syncope: the Framingham Study.  Stroke. 1985;  16 626-629
• 2 Ganzeboom K S. et al . Prevalence and triggers of syncope in medical students.  Am J Cardiol. 2003;  91 1006-1008, A8
• 3 Blanc J J. et al . Prospective evaluation and outcome of patients admitted for syncope over a 1 year period.  Eur Heart J. 2002;  23 815-820
• 4 Quinn J V. et al . Derivation of the San Francisco Syncope Rule to predict patients with short-term serious outcomes.  Ann Emerg Med. 2004;  43 224-232
• 5 Olde Nordkamp L K. et al . Syncope prevalence in the ED compared to general practice and population: a strong selection process.  Am J Emerg Med. 2009;  27 271-279
• 6 Quinn J. et al . Death after emergency department visits for syncope: how common and can it be predicted?.  Ann Emerg Med. 2008;  51 585-590
• 7 Brignole M. et al . Guidelines on management (diagnosis and treatment) of syncope-update 2004. Executive Summary.  Eur Heart J. 2004;  25 2054-2072
• 8 Chen L Y, Benditt D G, Shen W K. Management of syncope in adults: an update.  Mayo Clin Proc. 2008;  83 1280-1293
• 9 Lempert T, Bauer M, Schmidt D. Syncope: a videometric analysis of 56 episodes of transient cerebral hypoxia.  Ann Neurol. 1994;  36 233-237
• 10 Shah K H, Edlow J A. Transient ischemic attack: review for the emergency physician.  Ann Emerg Med. 2004;  43 592-604
• 11 Suzuki M. et al . Long-term survival of Japanese patients transported to an emergency department because of syncope.  Ann Emerg Med. 2004;  44 215-221
• 12 Huff J S. et al . Clinical policy: critical issues in the evaluation and management of adult patients presenting to the emergency department with syncope.  Ann Emerg Med. 2007;  49 431-444
• 13 Quinn J V, McDermott D. Medical decisionmaking and the San Francisco Syncope Rule.  Ann Emerg Med. 2006;  48 762-763; author reply 763
• 14 Laack T A, Goyal D G. Pulmonary embolism: an unsuspected killer.  Emerg Med Clin North Am. 2004;  22 961-983
• 15 Dalen J E. Pulmonary embolism: what have we learned since Virchow? Natural history, pathophysiology, and diagnosis.  Chest. 2002;  122 1440-1456
• 16 Ferrari E. et al . The ECG in pulmonary embolism. Predictive value of negative T waves in precordial leads – 80 case reports.  Chest. 1997;  111 537-543
• 17 Rodger M. et al . Diagnostic value of the electrocardiogram in suspected pulmonary embolism.  Am J Cardiol. 2000;  86 807-809, A10
• 18 Brignole M. et al . Guidelines on management (diagnosis and treatment) of syncope – update 2004.  Europace. 2004;  6 467-537
• 19 Al-Hity W, Playforth M J. Collapse, hoarseness of the voice and swelling and bruising of the neck: an unusual presentation of thoracic aortic dissection.  Emerg Med J. 2001;  18 508-509
• 20 Ashe A, Counselman F L. Acute thoracic aortic dissection is a true emergency.  J Emerg Med. 2002;  23 301-303
• 21 Chan-Tack K M. Aortic dissection presenting as bilateral testicular pain.  N Engl J Med. 2000;  343 1199
• 22 Hagan P G. et al . The International Registry of Acute Aortic Dissection (IRAD): new insights into an old disease.  JAMA. 2000;  283 897-903
• 23 Klompas M. Does this patient have an acute thoracic aortic dissection?.  JAMA. 2002;  287 2262-2272
• 24 Sullivan P R. et al . Diagnosis of acute thoracic aortic dissection in the emergency department.  Am J Emerg Med. 2000;  18 46-50
• 25 Young J, Herd A M. Painless acute aortic dissection and rupture presenting as syncope.  J Emerg Med. 2002;  22 171-174
• 26 Seet C M. Clinical presentation of patients with subarachnoid haemorrhage at a local emergency department.  Singapore Med J. 1999;  40 383-385
• 27 Iltumur K. et al . Coexisting subarachnoid hemorrhage and subdural hematoma mimicking acute anterolateral myocardial infarction.  J Electrocardiol. 2007;  40 422-425
• 28 Schuiling W J. et al . ECG abnormalities in predicting secondary cerebral ischemia after subarachnoid haemorrhage.  Acta Neurochir (Wien). 2006;  148 853-858; discussion 858
• 29 Yusuf S W, Bhalla K S, Champion J C. Intracranial bleed mimicking acute myocardial infarction.  Intern Med J. 2007;  37 339-340
• 30 Atkins D. et al . Syncope and orthostatic hypotension.  Am J Med. 1991;  91 179-185
• 31 Quinn J. et al . Prospective validation of the San Francisco Syncope Rule to predict patients with serious outcomes.  Ann Emerg Med. 2006;  47 448-454