Patients With Brugada Syndrome and Implanted Cardioverter-Defibrillators: Long-Term Follow-Up

Abstract

BackgroundImplantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) indications for primary prevention in Brugada syndrome (BrS) are still debated. ObjectivesThe authors investigated the long-term outcome after ICD implantation in a large cohort of BrS patients. MethodsOf a total of 370 patients with BrS in follow-up (age 43 ± 14 years; 74% male), 104 patients (28.1%) were treated with ICDs. The authors analyzed the long-term incidence of shocks and complications. ResultsAn ICD was implanted for secondary prevention in 10 patients (9.6%) and for primary prevention in 94 patients (90.4%). After a follow-up of 9.3 ± 5.1 years, 21 patients (20.2%) experienced a total of 81 appropriate shocks (incidence rate 2.2 per 100 person-years). The rate of appropriate shocks was higher in secondary prevention patients (p < 0.01). However, 4 of the 45 asymptomatic patients (8.9%) experienced appropriate ICD therapy, all with a spontaneous type 1 electrocardiogram and inducible ventricular arrhythmias. In the multivariable analysis, type 1 electrocardiogram with syncope (hazard ratio: 4.96; 95% confidence interval: 1.87 to 13.14; p < 0.01) and secondary prevention indication (hazard ratio: 6.85; 95% confidence interval: 2.29 to 20.50; p < 0.01) were significant predictors of appropriate therapy. Nine patients (8.7%) experienced 37 inappropriate shocks (incidence rate 0.9 per 100 person-years). Twenty-one patients (20.2%) had other ICD-related complications (incidence rate 1.4 per 100 person-years). Three patients (2.9%) died (1 electrical storm and 2 noncardiovascular deaths). ConclusionsICD therapy is an effective therapy in high-risk patients with BrS. However, it is also associated with a significant risk of device-related complications. Special care during ICD implantation, adequate device programming, and regular follow-up may allow reducing the number of adverse events.