Higher Dispersion Measures of Conduction and Repolarization in Type 1 Compared to Non-type 1 Brugada Syndrome Patients: An Electrocardiographic Study From a Single Center

Abstract

Background: Brugada syndrome (BrS) is a cardiac ion channelopathy that predisposes affected individuals to sudden cardiac death (SCD). Type 1 BrS is thought to take a more malignant clinical course than non-type 1 BrS. We hypothesized that the degrees of abnormal repolarization and conduction are greater in type 1 subjects and these differences can be detected by electrocardiography (ECG).Methods: Electrocardiographic data from spontaneous type 1 and non-type 1 BrS patients were analyzed. ECG parameters were measured from leads V1 to V3. Values were expressed as median [lower quartile-upper quartile] and compared using Kruskal-Wallis ANOVA.Results: Compared to non-type 1 BrS patients (n = 29), patients with spontaneous type 1 patterns (n = 22) showed similar (P > 0.05) heart rate (73 [64–77] vs. 68 [62–80] bpm), QRS duration (136 [124–161] vs. 127 [117–144] ms), uncorrected QT (418 [393–443] vs. 402 [386–424] ms) and corrected QT intervals (457 [414–474] vs. 430 [417–457] ms), JTpeak intervals (174 [144–183] vs. 174 [150–188] ms), Tpeak− Tend intervals (101 [93–120] vs. 99 [90–105] ms), Tpeak− Tend/QT ratios (0.25 [0.23–0.27] vs. 0.24 [0.22–0.27]), Tpeak− Tend/QRS (0.77 [0.62–0.87] vs. 0.77 [0.69–0.86]), Tpeak− Tend/(QRS × QT) (0.00074 [0.00034–0.00096] vs. 0.00073 [0.00048–0.00012] ms−1), index of Cardiac Electrophysiological Balance (iCEB, QT/QRS, marker of wavelength: 3.14 [2.56–3.35] vs. 3.21 [2.85–3.46]) and corrected iCEB (QTc/QRS: 3.25 [2.91–3.73] vs. 3.49 [2.99–3.78]). Higher QRS dispersion was seen in type 1 subjects (QRSd: 34 [24–66] vs. 24 [12–34] ms) but QT dispersion (QTd: 48 [39–71] vs. 43 [22–94] ms), QTc dispersion (QTcd: 52 [41–79] vs. 46 [23–104] ms), JTpeak dispersion (44 [23–62] vs. 45 [30–62] ms), Tpeak− Tend dispersion (28 [15–34] vs. 29 [22–53] ms) or Tpeak− Tend/QT dispersion (0.06 [0.03–0.08] vs. 0.08 [0.04–0.12]) did not differ between the two groups. Type 1 subjects showed higher (QRSd × Tpeak− Tend)/QRS (25 [19–44] vs. 19 [9–30] ms) but similar iCEB dispersion (0.83 [0.49–1.14] vs. 0.61 [0.34–0.92]) and iCEBc dispersion (0.93 [0.51–1.15] vs. 0.65 [0.39–0.96]).Conclusion: Higher levels of dispersion in conduction and repolarization are found in type 1 than non-type 1 BrS patients, potentially explaining the higher incidence of ventricular arrhythmias in the former group.

Temporal Variability in Electrocardiographic Indices in Subjects With Brugada Patterns

“…Firstly, a comprehensive analysis of different ECG features has been performed, with 3–50 ECGs measured per patient, and a total of more than 1000 ECGs analyzed. This extended previous studies using only single ECG measurements at baseline ( Tse et al, 2018b ; Lee et al, 2020 ). Moreover, there is good inter and intra-observer variability, as reflected by the intra-class coefficient.…”

Territory-wide cohort study of Brugada syndrome in Hong Kong: predictors of long-term outcomes using random survival forests and non-negative matrix factorisation

“…This study included consecutive patients diagnosed with BrS between 1997 to 2019 identified from searching electronic health records from the Hospital Authority of Hong Kong, as described previously. 12–15 The diagnosis of BrS was confirmed by reviewing the patient case notes and documented ECGs by SL. and GT using the 2017 diagnostic criteria proposed by the Expert Consensus Statement.…”

Wide QRS complex and the risk of major arrhythmic events in Brugada syndrome patients: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

“…Tse et al reported higher QRS dispersion in Type‐1 BrS than non‐Type‐1 BrS. However, no MAE was compared or reported . Our group published a comprehensive systemic review and meta‐analysis on fragmented QRS as a predictor of arrhythmic event in BrS and showed that baseline fragmented QRS increased major arrhythmic events up to 3‐fold .…”