| Literature DB >> 33330665 |
Ramadan Ghaleb1, Matteo Anselmino2, Luca Gaido2, Stefano Quaranta2, Carla Giustetto2, Mohammed Kamal Salama3, Ayman Salh4, Marco Scaglione5, Enas Fathy1, Fiorenzo Gaita2.
Abstract
Aim: This study aims to describe prevalence and clinical significance of latent Brugada syndrome (BrS) in a young population with atrial fibrillation (AF).Entities:
Keywords: Brugada syndrome; atrial fibrillation; class 1 antiarrhythmic drugs; sudden cardiac death; transcatheter ablation
Year: 2020 PMID: 33330665 PMCID: PMC7710870 DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2020.602536
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med ISSN: 2297-055X
Figure 1Study flowchart. *including the two patients who are +ve in Holter. AAD, antiarrhythmic drug; AF, atrial fibrillation; DM, diabetes mellitus; HTN, hypertension; SCD, sudden cardiac death; SHD, structural heart disease; +ve, positive; –ve, negative.
Individual clinical characteristics of patients with atrial fibrillation and BrS type 1 ECG patterns (group 1).
| 1 | 20 | M | No | No | No | rSr′ | AVRT | No | No | No | Yes | Beta blocker |
| 2 | 23 | M | No | No | Yes | rSr′ | No | –ve | No | No | Yes | No |
| 3 | 39 | F | Yes | No | No | rSr′ | No | No | No | No | Yes | Beta blocker |
| 4 | 38 | M | No | No | Yes | Type 2 | SSS | +ve | Yes | +ve | Yes | HQ |
| 5 | 45 | F | No | Yes | No | Type 3 | No | No | No | –ve | No | HQ |
| 6 | 43 | M | No | No | No | Type 3 | No | No | No | –ve | No | No |
| 7 | 42 | M | No | No | Yes | Type 3 | No | +ve | Yes | –ve | No | HQ |
| 8 | 28 | M | No | No | No | rSr′ | No | No | No | No | Yes | Beta blocker |
| 9 | 41 | M | No | No | Yes | Type 2 | No | No | No | No | No | HQ |
| 10 | 40 | F | No | No | No | Type 2 | No | No | No | No | No | HQ |
| 11 | 45 | F | No | Yes | No | Type 3 | No | No | No | +ve | No | HQ |
| 12 | 43 | F | No | No | No | Type 2 | No | No | No | –ve | No | No |
| 13 | 31 | M | No | No | No | rSr′ | No | No | No | No | Yes | HQ |
AAD, antiarrhythmic drug; AFL, atrial flutter; AVRT, atrioventricular nodal reentrant tachycardia; BBB, bundle branch block; BrS, Brugada syndrome; ECG, electrocardiogram; ED, electrical disturbance; EPS, electrophysiology study; F, female; HC, hydroquinidine; M, male; SCD, sudden cardiac death; SSS, sick sinus syndrome; TC, transcatheter.
Figure 2Precordial leads of the ECG of patient No. 13 showing atrial fibrillation with no suspicion for Brugada pattern. (A) At sinus rhythm restoration by IV Flecanide, type 1 Brugada ECG pattern emerged in V1–V2 (B).
Figure 3Example of a positive ajmaline test: basal ECG with V1–V2 in the 2nd intercostal space showing minimal r′. (A) Five minutes after starting intravenous infusion of ajmaline, a type 1 BrS ECG pattern emerged (B) and persisted over the following minute (C).
Basic clinical characteristics of the study population, stratified by group.
| Mean age (years) | 37 ± 8 | 35 ± 7 | 0.42 |
| Male | 7 (54%) | 54 (83%) | |
| Family history of BrS | 2 (15%) | 0 | |
| Family history of SCD | 1 (8%) | 1 (1.5%) | 0.20 |
| Family history of AF | 0 | 7 (11%) | 0.22 |
| Syncope | 4 (31%) | 5 (8%) | 0.02 |
| Vagally mediated AF | 2 (15%) | 15 (58%) | 0.01 |
| Paroxysmal AF | 13(100%) | 54 (83%) | 0.40 |
| Persistent AF | 0 | 12 (19%) | 0.09 |
| Ejection fraction (%) | 60 ± 4 | 60 ± 6 | 0.68 |
| Dilated LA (AP >40 mm) | 2 (15%) | 29 (45%) | 0.05 |
| PR (ms) | 160 ± 35 | 158 ± 29 | 0.86 |
| QRS (ms) | 83 ± 8 | 94 ± 14 | |
| QTc (ms) | 420 ± 25 | 399 ± 29 | 0.03 |
| Early repolarization | 1 (8%) | 13 (20%) | 0.28 |
| Antiarrhythmic drugs | 6 (46%) | 50 (77%) | 0.02 |
| Sotalol (class II) | 0 | 15 (23%) | 0.05 |
| Class 1C | 1 (8%) | 39 (60%) | <0.01 |
| Amiodarone (class III) | 0 | 7 (11%) | 0.21 |
Fisher's exact test for categorical variables and Student's t-test for continuous variables; P < 0.05, considered to indicate a significant difference, in italics.
AF, atrial fibrillation; AP, anterior–posterior; BrS, Brugada syndrome; ECG, electrocardiogram; LA, left atrium; PAF, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation; SCD, sudden cardiac death.
At the time of the first observation.