ArticleClinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society2025
Predictive value of Shanghai score system in patients with drug-induced type 1 Brugada electrocardiographic pattern.
Article in Clinical research in cardiology : official journal of the German Cardiac Society, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundThe Shanghai score system was developed to enhance the risk stratification in Brugada Syndrome (BrS); however, its prognostic value in drug-induced type 1 BrS remains unclear.
methodsThis study involved 698 patients with drug-induced type 1 BrS, confirmed via pharmacologic challenge (flecainide or ajmaline), from 21 centers in Italy and Switzerland. Patients were classified according to the Shanghai score system: probable/definite BrS (score ≥ 3.5) and possible BrS (score < 3.5). The primary outcome was appropriate ICD therapy or sudden cardiac death (SCD)/sustained ventricular arrhythmias; the secondary outcome includes the identification of clinical predictors of primary outcome events. Kaplan-Meier and Cox regression analyses were used.
resultsOur study population included 239 patients (34.2%) with probable/definite BrS and 459 (65.8%) patients with possible BrS. During a median follow-up of 57.4 months, 20 patients (2.9%) experienced the primary outcome. Kaplan-Meier analysis revealed a significantly lower event rate in possible BrS (0.11% over 10 years) compared to probable/definite BrS (0.42%). SCN5A pathogenic variants were a significant predictor of primary endpoint in the possible BrS group (OR: 12.5).
conclusionsShanghai score system for BrS diagnosis may be useful as a tool for risk stratification of life-threatening arrhythmias among patients with drug-induced type I BrS ECG. Identifying the SCN5A mutations is of pivotal importance for refining the risk stratification.
Indexed as
Identifiers
40996547What 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.