ArticleCureus2025
Safe Anesthesia for Brugada Syndrome in Pregnancy: Insights From a Retrospective Case Series.
Article in Cureus, 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
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Introduction Brugada syndrome (BrS) is a cardiac channelopathy associated with sudden cardiac death and presents unique anesthetic challenges during pregnancy due to autonomic fluctuations and sensitivity to sodium channel-blocking agents. This study examines anesthetic strategies and outcomes in pregnant women with BrS. Methods We conducted a retrospective review of pregnant patients with confirmed or suspected BrS who delivered at our institution between 2012 and 2023. Data collected included ECG patterns, family history, anesthetic technique and agents, delivery details, and maternal and neonatal outcomes. Results Ten women accounted for 21 pregnancy-related events. Regional anesthesia was used in 19 cases: 18 with epidural analgesia (0.2% ropivacaine and opioids) and one spinal with bupivacaine. One patient received remifentanil, and another underwent general anesthesia. No arrhythmic or hemodynamic complications were observed. Mean epidural duration was 5.34 hours. All patients underwent continuous ECG monitoring during labor and for 24 hours postpartum. All neonates had favorable outcomes. Discussion Epidural anesthesia appears safe in BrS pregnancies when combined with continuous monitoring and multidisciplinary care. While serum anesthetic concentration is the primary arrhythmogenic risk factor, caution is advised with prolonged infusions due to potential systemic accumulation. The postpartum period remains a high-risk phase requiring extended surveillance. Conclusion With appropriate planning and monitoring, neuraxial anesthesia can be safely employed in BrS pregnancies. These findings support the development of tailored peripartum management protocols for this high-risk population.
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.