ArticleHeart rhythm O22025
Spontaneous type 1 ECG and arrhythmic risk in Brugada syndrome: A meta-analysis of adjusted time-to-event data.
Article in Heart rhythm O2, 2025. 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.
- Sudden cardiac arrest in young adults: A comprehensive systematic review of epidemiology, aetiology and preventive strategies.Heart international · 2026Review
- Exploration of the Role of Cilostazol in Brugada Syndrome: Mechanisms, Therapeutic Potential, and Implications in the Prevention of Ventricular Arrhythmias.Reviews in cardiovascular medicine · 2026Review
- Beyond the type 1 pattern: comprehensive risk stratification in Brugada syndrome.Journal of interventional cardiac electrophysiology : an international journal of arrhythmias and pacing · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
25 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Brugada syndrome (BrS) is associated with an increased risk of major arrhythmic events (MAEs), particularly in patients with a spontaneous type 1 electrocardiographic (ECG) pattern. Objective: Because previous meta-analyses used mainly crude or unadjusted data from observational studies, we conducted an updated meta-analysis on the prognostic role of spontaneous type 1 ECG in BrS patients combining adjusted and unadjusted data separately. Methods: We conducted a systematic search of PubMed and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to May 2024. Studies providing hazard ratios for MAEs associated with spontaneous type 1 ECG in BrS patients were included. Results: Eighteen studies comprising 7238 patients were included, with 10 providing adjusted and 17 providing unadjusted data. Separate pooled analyses using a random-effects model demonstrated a significantly increased risk of MAEs in BrS patients with spontaneous type 1 ECG compared with those without, with a pooled adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) of 2.05 (95% CI 1.38-3.03) and an unadjusted hazard ratio of 2.97 (95% CI 2.04-4.34). Subgroup analysis revealed higher risks in studies with non-Asian populations and those including patients with no history of aborted cardiac arrest (aHR 2.36, 95% CI 1.35-4.11; and aHR 3.56, 95% CI 2.35-5.41, respectively) and a persistent significant risk in studies accounting for syncope as a covariate (aHR 2.01, 95% CI 1.24-3.27). Conclusion: Our analysis indicates that patients with BrS and spontaneous type 1 ECG are at higher risk of MAEs. This is consistent across various subgroups, including asymptomatic individuals.
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.