Search

Background Pharmacological treatment of atrial fibrillation (AF) in the setting of Brugada syndrome (BrS) is challenging. In addition, patients with BrS with an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) might experience inappropriate shocks for fast AF. Long-term outcome of pulmonary vein isolation in BrS has not been well established yet, and it is still unclear whether pulmonary vein triggers are the only pathophysiological mechanism of AF in BrS. The aim of the study is to assess the long-term outcomes in patients with BrS undergoing pulmonary vein isolation for paroxysmal AF compared with a matched cohort of patients without BrS. Methods and Results Sixty patients with BrS undergoing pulmonary vein isolation with cryoballoon catheter ablation for paroxysmal AF were matched with 60 patients without BrS, who underwent the same procedure. After a mean follow-up of 58.2±31.7 months, freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmias was achieved in 61.7% in the BrS group and in 78.3% in the non-BrS group (log-rank P =0.047). In particular, freedom from AF was 76.7% in the first group and in 83.3% in the second ( P =0.27), while freedom from atrial tachycardia/atrial flutter was 85% and 95% ( P =0.057). In the BrS group, 29 patients (48.3%) had an ICD and 8 (27.6%) had a previous ICD-inappropriate shock for fast AF. In the BrS cohort, ICD-inappropriate interventions for AF were significantly reduced after ablation (3.4% versus 27.6%; P =0.01). Conclusions Pulmonary vein isolation in patients with BrS was associated with higher rate of arrhythmic recurrence. Despite this, catheter ablation significantly reduced inappropriate ICD interventions in BrS patients and can be considered a therapeutic strategy to prevent inappropriate device therapies.

Background: The pathogenesis of Brugada syndrome (BrS) and consequently of abnormal electrograms (aEGMs) found in the epicardium of the right ventricular outflow tract (RVOT-EPI) is controversial., Objective: The purpose of this study was to analyze aEGM from high-density RVOT-EPI electroanatomic mapping (EAM)., Methods: All patients undergoing RVOT-EPI EAM with the HD-Grid catheter for BrS were retrospectively included. Maps were acquired before and after ajmaline, and all patients had concomitant noninvasive electrocardiographic imaging with annotation of RVOT-EPI latest activation time (RVOTat). High-frequency potentials (HFPs) were defined as ventricular potentials occurring during or after the far-field ventricular EGM showing a local activation time (HFPat). Low-frequency potentials (LFPs) were defined as aEGMs occurring after near-field ventricular activation showing fractionation or delayed components. Their activation time from surface ECG was defined as LFPat., Results: Fifteen consecutive patients were included in the study. At EAM before ajmaline, 7 patients (46.7%) showed LFPs. All patients showed HFPs before and after ajmaline and LFPs after ajmaline. Mean HFPat (134.4 vs 65.3 ms, P <.001), mean LFPat (224.6 vs 113.6 ms, P <.001), and mean RVOTat (124.8 vs 55.9 ms, P <.001) increased after ajmaline. RVOTat correlated with HFPat before (ρ = 0.76) and after ajmaline (ρ = 0.82), while RVOTat was shorter than LFPat before (P <.001) and after ajmaline (P <.001). BrS patients with history of aborted sudden cardiac death had longer aEGMs after ajmaline., Conclusion: Two different types of aEGMs are described from BrS high-density epicardial mapping. This might correlate with depolarization and repolarization abnormalities., (Copyright © 2021 Heart Rhythm Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background The rate of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in Brugada syndrome (BrS) is ≈1%/y. Noninvasive electrocardiographic imaging is a noninvasive mapping system that has a role in assessing BrS depolarization and repolarization abnormalities. This study aimed to analyze electrocardiographic imaging parameters during ajmaline test (AJT). Methods and Results All consecutive epicardial maps of the right ventricle outflow tract (RVOT-EPI) in BrS with CardioInsight were retrospectively analyzed. (1) RVOT-EPI activation time (RVOT-AT); (2) RVOT-EPI recovery time, and (3) RVOT-EPI activation-recovery interval (RVOT-ARI) were calculated. ∆RVOT-AT, ∆RVOT-EPI recovery time, and ∆RVOT-ARI were defined as the difference in parameters before and after AJT. SCD-BrS patients were defined as individuals presenting a history of aborted SCD. Thirty-nine patients with BrS were retrospectively analyzed and 12 patients (30.8%) were SCD-BrS. After AJT, an increase in both RVOT-AT [105.9 milliseconds versus 65.8 milliseconds, P <0.001] and RVOT-EPI recovery time [403.4 milliseconds versus 365.7 milliseconds, P <0.001] was observed. No changes occurred in RVOT-ARI [297.5 milliseconds versus 299.9 milliseconds, P =0.7]. Before AJT no differences were observed between SCD-BrS and non SCD-BrS in RVOT-AT, RVOT-EPI recovery time, and RVOT-ARI ( P =0.9, P =0.91, P =0.86, respectively). Following AJT, SCD-BrS patients showed higher RVOT-AT, higher ∆RVOT-AT, lower RVOT-ARI, and lower ∆RVOT-ARI ( P <0.001, P <0.001, P =0.007, P =0.002, respectively). At the univariate logistic regression, predictors of SCD-BrS were the following: RVOT-AT after AJT (specificity: 0.74, sensitivity 1.00, area under the curve 0.92); ∆RVOT-AT (specificity: 0.74, sensitivity 0.92, area under the curve 0.86); RVOT-ARI after AJT (specificity 0.96, sensitivity 0.58, area under the curve 0.79), and ∆RVOT-ARI (specificity 0.85, sensitivity 0.67, area under the curve 0.76). Conclusions Noninvasive electrocardiographic imaging can be useful in evaluating the results of AJT in BrS.