Elsevier

Heart Rhythm

Volume 9, Issue 2, February 2012, Pages 242-248
Heart Rhythm

Clinical
Genetic
Clinical impact of the number of extrastimuli in programmed electrical stimulation in patients with Brugada type 1 electrocardiogram

Presented in part at the American Heart Association 2010, Chicago, IL, November 13–17, 2010, and published in abstract form in Circulation 2010;122:A15371.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2011.09.053Get rights and content

Background

Use of programmed electrical stimulation (PES) for risk stratification of Brugada syndrome (BrS) is controversial.

Objective

To elucidate the role of the number of extrastimuli during PES in patients with BrS.

Methods

Consecutive 108 patients with type 1 electrocardiogram (104 men, mean age 46 ± 12 years; 26 with ventricular fibrillation [VF], 40 with syncope, and 42 asymptomatic) underwent PES with a maximum of 3 extrastimuli from the right ventricular apex and the right ventricular outflow tract. Ventricular arrhythmia (VA) was defined as VF or nonsustained polymorphic ventricular tachycardia >15 beats. Patients with VA induced by a single extrastimulus or double extrastimuli were assigned to group SD (Single/Double), by triple extrastimuli to group T (Triple), and the remaining patients to group N.

Results

VA was induced in 81 patients (VF in 71 and polymorphic ventricular tachycardia in 10), in 4 by a single extrastimulus, in 41 by double extrastimuli, and in 36 by triple extrastimuli. During 79 ± 48 months of follow-up, 24 patients had VF events. Although the overall inducibility of VA was not associated with an increased risk of VF (log-rank P = .78), group SD had worse prognosis than did group T (P = .004). Kaplan–Meier analysis in patients without prior VF also showed that group SD had poorer outcome than did group T and group N (P = .001). Positive and negative predictive values of VA induction with up to 2 extrastimuli were, respectively, 36% and 87%, better than those with up to 3 (23% and 81%, respectively).

Conclusions

The number of extrastimuli that induced VA served as a prognostic indicator for patients with Brugada type 1 electrocardiogram. Single extrastimulus or double extrastimuli were adequate for PES of patients with BrS.

Introduction

Brugada syndrome (BrS) is a channelopathy that can cause sudden death due to ventricular fibrillation (VF) in apparently healthy individuals in their prime. Since Brugada et al reported it first in 1992, several indices have been reported as reliable prognostic factors.1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 However, there remains much room for debate in prognostic indices except for history of VF.7 Although induction of lethal ventricular arrhythmia (VA) by programmed electrical stimulation (PES) is still widely adopted for deciding the indication of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD), controversial data have been reported regarding its prognostic value.2, 4, 7, 8, 9 Brugada et al reported that VF inducibility by PES can be a strong predictor of subsequent cardiac events in patients with BrS.8 However, other studies could not confirm these findings.2, 4, 7 Because protocols of PES and backgrounds of patients were different in each study, direct comparison of the results was not possible. Moreover, clinical significance of the number of extrastimuli, the site of induction, and the coupling interval of extrastimuli at the time of VF induction by consistent protocol have not been fully elucidated.

The aim of the present study was to test the hypothesis that subsequent cardiac events occur more frequently in patients with BrS with induction of VAs by fewer extrastimuli during PES. Thus, we examined the relationships of several parameters of PES, especially the number of extrastimuli, the site of induction, and the coupling interval of extrastimuli at the time of VF induction, with subsequent cardiac events.

Section snippets

Study population

The study population consisted of consecutive 108 Japanese patients with Brugada type 1 electrocardiogram (ECG) in the absence or presence of sodium-channel–blocking agent (104 men, mean age 46 ± 12 years) who underwent electrophysiological study at National Cerebral and Cardiovascular Center, Suita, Japan, between 1993 and 2009. Twenty-six patients had a history of VF, 40 had a history of syncope, and 42 were asymptomatic at the time of the electrophysiological study. Patients' characteristics

Electrophysiological study

VA was induced in 81 patients (VF in 71 and PVT in 10): in 4 by single extrastimulus, in 41 by double extrastimuli, and in 36 by triple extrastimuli. There were 45 patients in group SD, 36 in group T, and 27 in group N.

Patients' characteristics are presented in Table 2. There were no significant differences among the 3 groups in gender, age, history of VF or syncope, family history of BrS or sudden death under 45 years of age, and age at the first cardiac event. There were also no significant

Conclusion

The number of extrastimuli in PES that induced ventricular arrhythmias served as a prognostic indicator for patients with type 1 Brugada ECG. The site of induction and the coupling interval of extrastimuli at the time of VF induction were not prognostic indicators of patients with BrS. Our data suggest that PES in patients with type 1 Brugada ECG should employ up to 2 extrastimuli, rather than 3.

References (24)

  • T. Ikeda et al.

    Noninvasive risk stratification of subjects with a Brugada-type electrocardiogram and no history of cardiac arrest

    Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol

    (2005)
  • V. Probst et al.

    Long-term prognosis of patients diagnosed with Brugada syndrome: results from the FINGER Brugada syndrome registry

    Circulation

    (2010)
  • Cited by (0)

    This work was supported by a research grant for the cardiovascular diseases (grant number H23-114, 22-1-2) from the Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare, Japan, and a grant from Japan Cardiovascular Research Foundation. Dr Shimizu was supported in part by a research grant for the cardiovascular diseases (grant number 21C-8, 22-4-7) from the Ministry of Health, Labor, and Welfare, Japan, and a Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research on Innovative Areas (grant number 22136011).

    View full text