SynthesisFrontiers in cardiovascular medicine2022
Incidence, recurrence and management of electrical storm in Brugada syndrome.
Synthesis in Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
3 citing papers in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- A Comprehensive Review of a Mechanism-Based Ventricular Electrical Storm Management.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Ion Channel Diseases as a Cause of Sudden Cardiac Death in Young People: Aspects of Their Diagnosis, Treatment, and Pathogenesis.Deutsches Arzteblatt international · 2024Review
- Management of patients with an electrical storm or clustered ventricular arrhythmias: a clinical consensus statement of the European Heart Rhythm Association of the ESC-endorsed by the Asia-Pacific Heart Rhythm Society, Heart Rhythm Society, and Latin-American Heart Rhythm Society.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Brugada syndrome (BrS) is associated with ventricular tachyarrhythmias. However, the presence of electrical strom (ES) and its management still debated. Objectives: We present the outcome and management of 44 BrS patients suffering from ES. Methods: A systematic literature review and pooled analysis Through database review including PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Libary and Cinahl studies were analyzed. Evidence from 7 reports of 808 BrS patients was identified. Results: The mean age of patients suffering from ES was 34 ± 9.5 months (94.7% males, 65.8% spontaneous BrS type I). Using electrophysiological study ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation were inducible in 12/23 (52.2%). Recurrence of ES was documented in 6.1%. Death from ES was 8.2% after a follow-up of 83.5 ± 53.4. In up to 27 ES resolved without treatment. External shock was required in 35.6%, internal ICD shock in 13.3%, Overdrive pacing, left cardiac sympathetic block and atropin in 2.2%. Short-term antiarrhythmic management was as the following: Isopreterenol or Isopreterenol in combination with quinidine 35.5%, orciprenaline in 2.2%, quinidine 2.2%, disopyramide 2.2% or denopamide 2.2%. However, lidocaine, magensium sulfate, mexiletine and propanolol failed to control ES. Conclusion: Although ES is rare in BrS, this entity challenges physicians. Despite its high mortality rate, spontaneous termination is possible. Short-term management using Isoproterenol and/or quinidine might be safe. Prospective studies on management of ES are warranted.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.