MétaCan
Menu
Retour à la cohorte
Enregistrement W4297183297 · doi:10.1093/brain/awac347

Patients with POTS fear that data on abnormal haemodynamic physiology have been ignored

2022· letter· en· W4297183297 sur OpenAlexafffundabout
Kate M. Bourne, Vidya Raj, Robert S. Sheldon, Satish R. Raj

Notice bibliographique

RevueBrain · 2022
Typeletter
Langueen
DomaineMedicine
ThématiqueCardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic Disorders
Établissements canadiensLibin Cardiovascular Institute of AlbertaUniversity of Calgary
Organismes subventionnairesCanadian Institutes of Health ResearchNational Center for Advancing Translational SciencesVanderbilt Institute for Clinical and Translational ResearchNational Institutes of HealthVanderbilt University
Mots-clésMedical schoolMedicineLibrary scienceGerontologyMedical education

Résumé

récupéré en direct d'OpenAlex

Norcliffe-Kaufmann et al.1 recently reported that patients with postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome (POTS) had an exaggerated anticipatory heart rate (HR) increase in the 30 s prior to head-up tilt (HUT). Based largely on these findings, the authors conclude that patients with POTS suffer from a ‘fear-conditioning behavioural response’ to the thought of standing, and that POTS is a ‘functional psychogenic disorder’ that would best be treated by mental health professionals. Their basic finding is of potential interest; unfortunately their conclusions ignore limitations in their participant selection, methodological approach, and prior research into POTS pathophysiology, and they illustrate their lack of knowledge of psychiatric diagnosis and care. A major study limitation is the choice to compare POTS patients with a healthy control group. In a previous report,2 participants with POTS scored higher on the anxiety sensitivity index than healthy control participants, but scores were not significantly different compared to the general population.2 Patients with chronic illness have elevated depression, anxiety and health anxiety scores compared to healthy controls.3 Consequently, Norcliffe-Kaufmann et al.1 should have chosen a control group with chronic illness but without an orthostatic disorder. Without this control group, the study finding of exaggerated anticipatory tachycardia to a tilt stimulus may simply reflect elevated somatic anxiety due to chronic illness. Importantly, POTS patients very often have symptomatic postural sinus tachycardia throughout the day. Norcliffe-Kaufmann et al.1 would do well to explain how anticipation of a tilt test could cause hours of symptoms every day for months. They might also reflect on the numerous and well documented symptoms and signs of POTS patients such as daily headache, brain fog, patchy sympathetic denervation and dependent acrocyanosis. The magnitude of the anticipatory HR increase is barely ‘exaggerated’. Figure 1B in Norcliffe-Kaufmann et al.1 shows the supine anticipatory HR increase was 8 bpm in POTS patients and 3.5 bpm in healthy controls, with all values in the normal range. If the HR increase is due to ‘anticipatory anxiety’, it may well be in anticipation of a medical procedure (the HUT), and not of simply standing. It is likely that many of the POTS patients have had a prior HUT, which most people describe as an unpleasant test, while most ‘healthy controls’ would have not undergone a previous tilt test. Therefore, the trigger for an anticipatory response was likely not equal between groups and may have been associated with anticipating a medical test and not day-to-day standing. Norcliffe-Kaufmann et al.1 ignore the large amount of literature that documents abnormal physiology in POTS patients including low blood volume4,5 and low stroke volume,4,5 especially when upright, compared to healthy participants. It is curious that the authors did not report the stroke volume in their patients, especially given that the Finometer® continuous blood pressure monitor that was used in this study can give estimates of stroke volume. Several strategies that target low blood volume and low stroke volume, but do not target ‘anticipatory anxiety’, will lower the upright HR and improve symptom burden in patients with POTS. These interventions include exercise training,5 a high sodium diet,4 lower body compression garments6 and ivabradine (a drug that affects sinus node automaticity).7 All these successful interventions target abnormal hemodynamic physiology, and none target a ‘fear of standing’. The lack of reported physiological data is at minimum an unfortunate omission. Perhaps the authors could clarify how anticipation of a tilt test has such a profound effect on blood volume and the response to interventions that target it. Masuki et al.8 conducted an elegant study to tease out the role of anxiety versus gravitational fluid shifts as the cause of excessive tachycardia in patients with POTS. They simulated standing using lower body negative pressure (LBNP), in which negative pressure (suction) is applied to the lower body, causing blood to shift from the thorax into the abdomen and legs. LBNP simulates the intravascular fluid shifts that occur with the assumption of upright posture. This simulated orthostatic stress reduces stroke volume, unloads the baroreceptors and activates the baroreflex, resulting in increased sympathetic nervous system activation and increased HR. When Masuki et al.8 applied LBNP, patients with POTS had a significantly higher HR increase compared to the healthy controls, without a change in blood pressure. When the protocol was repeated with the medical antishock trouser (MAST) pants inflated (to insulate the legs from suction), this HR increase was essentially eliminated. When the vacuum sound was applied without any negative pressure (negative control), the HR did not increase in patients with POTS.8 These data elegantly demonstrated that the increase in HR seen in patients with POTS was driven by the shift of fluids away from the thorax (baroreceptor unloading) and not the anticipation of LBNP. The authors are incorrect in labelling fear conditioning as a psychiatric disorder. The phenomenon of fear conditioning is an anxiety response to the threat of uncertainty following prior experience with an unpleasant stimulus,9 in this case tilt testing. POTS is not a functional psychogenic disorder as these ‘fear conditioning’ and ‘psychogenic disorders’ are very different entities. Psychogenic disorders are recognized by physical symptoms that are incompatible with or in gross excess of organic findings, along with variable health-related anxiety and insight. Treatment involves psychotherapy and prognosis is often limited. The wealth of data on physiological perturbations in POTS, and favourable response to non-psychological treatments, are not consistent with a psychogenic disorder. The authors suggest the optimal treatment for POTS should be led by psychiatric care. This has already failed. In a large survey of over 4800 POTS patients, prior to diagnosis, 77% of patients were told their symptoms could be the result of psychological or psychiatric problem, but only 28% felt that they were actually experiencing a psychological or psychiatric problem.10 After their POTS diagnosis, only 37% of participants had a doctor tell them their symptoms were the result of a psychological or psychiatric problem, and 31% were being treated for a psychological or psychiatric problem.10 If the authors’ conjecture is correct that the optimal treatment of POTS lies in the realm of psychiatric care, one would expect that most of these patients would get better with the high prevalence of psychiatry care. Unfortunately, that was not the case. The authors’ conjecture is too little, too late and too wrong. As providers and researchers for patients with POTS, we are interested in any interventions that could help these patients. We do agree that mental health should be considered in treating patients with POTS, as it is with many other disorders. The authors’ conclusion that POTS be recast as a ‘functional psychogenic disorder’ flies in the face of a vast body of published literature, and far outstrips their own results. If the authors truly believe that psychiatric care will make these patients better, we will eagerly look forward to their intervention study of psychiatric and psychological approaches to the treatment of patients with POTS. Data sharing is not applicable to this article as no new data were created or analysed in this study. This work was supported by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR; Ottawa, ON, Canada) grant MOP142426, and the Vanderbilt Institute for Clinical and Translational Research (NIH UL1-TR000445). S.R.R. is a consultant to Lundbeck LLC, Theravance Biopharma and Amneal Pharma related to neurogenic orthostatic hypotension; consultant to Servier Affaires Medicales, Regeneron and argenx BV related to postural orthostatic tachycardia syndrome. Honoraria from Spire Learning and Medscape are received for developing CME materials on neurogenic orthostatic hypotension. S.S.R. is DMSB Chair for a Phase 2 study of an irritable bowel syndrome medication for Arena Pharmaceuticals with compensation and Past-President of the American Autonomic Society without financial compensation. The other authors report no competing interests.

Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.

Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier

Prédiction machine sur la base complète

Imitation des enseignants

Ni prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.

score de la tête « metaresearch » (Codex)0,002
score de la tête « metaresearch » (Gemma)0,042
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cStatut de validation: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Catégories candidatesaucune
Catégories consensuellesaucune
DomaineSignal candidat: aucune · Signal consensuel: aucune
Devis d'étudeSignal candidat: Sans objet · Signal consensuel: Sans objet
GenreSignal candidat: Commentaire · Signal consensuel: Commentaire
Score de désaccord entre enseignants0,046
Score d'incertitude au seuil0,155

Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)

CatégorieCodexGemma
Métarecherche0,0020,042
Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict)0,0000,000
Méta-épidémiologie (sens large)0,0010,001
Bibliométrie0,0010,001
Études des sciences et des technologies0,0010,001
Communication savante0,0020,002
Science ouverte0,0000,002
Intégrité de la recherche0,0020,003
Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger)0,0460,006

Scores machine (provisoires)

Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.

Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.

Tête enseignante Opus0,019
Tête enseignante GPT0,237
Écart entre enseignants0,218 · la distance entre les deux têtes enseignantes sur ce seul travail
Statut de validationscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découle

Classification

machine, non validée

Prédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.

Les modèles n’ont appliqué aucune catégorie : rien dans la taxonomie ne correspondait à ce travail.
Devis d'étudeSans objet
Domainenon disponible
GenreCommentaire

Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».

En bref

Citations2
Publié2022
Routes d'admission3
Résumé présentoui

Explorer davantage

Même revueBrainMême sujetCardiovascular Syncope and Autonomic DisordersTravaux en français237 207