Kanitsoraphan, Chanavuth

AbstractIntroductionBrugada syndrome is an inherited arrhythmic disease associated with major arrhythmic events (MAE). The importance of primary prevention of sudden cardiac death (SCD) in Brugada syndrome is well recognized; however, ventricular arrhythmia risk stratification remains challenging and controversial. We aimed to assess the association of type of syncope with MAE via systematic review and meta‐analysis.MethodsWe comprehensively searched the databases of MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception to December 2021. Included studies were cohort (prospective or retrospective) studies that reported the types of syncope (cardiac, unexplained, vasovagal, and undifferentiated) and MAE. Data from each study were combined using the random‐effects, generic inverse variance method of DerSimonian and Laird to calculate the odds ratio (OR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs).ResultsSeventeen studies from 2005 to 2019 were included in this meta‐analysis involving 4355 Brugada syndrome patients. Overall, syncope was significantly associated with an increased risk of MAE in Brugada syndrome (OR = 3.90, 95% CI: 2.22–6.85, p < .001, I2 = 76.0%). By syncope type, cardiac (OR = 4.48, 95% CI: 2.87–7.01, p < .001, I2 = 0.0%) and unexplained (OR = 4.71, 95% CI: 1.34–16.57, p = .016, I2 = 37.3%) syncope was significantly associated with increased risk of MAE in Brugada syndrome. Vasovagal (OR = 2.90, 95% CI: 0.09–98.45, p = .554, I2 = 70.9%) and undifferentiated syncope (OR = 2.01, 95% CI: 1.00–4.03, p = .050, I2 = 64.6%, respectively) were not.ConclusionOur study demonstrated that cardiac and unexplained syncope was associated with MAE risk in Brugada syndrome populations but not in vasovagal syncope and undifferentiated syncope. Unexplained syncope is associated with a similar increased risk of MAE compared to cardiac syncope.

AbstractIntroductionAtrial fibrillation (AF) is the most common cardiac arrhythmia with a high stroke and mortality rate. The video‐assisted thoracoscopic radiofrequency pulmonary vein ablation is a treatment option for patients who fail catheter ablation. Randomized data comparing surgical versus catheter ablation are limited. We performed a meta‐analysis of randomized control trials to explore the outcome efficacy between surgical and catheter radiofrequency pulmonary vein ablation in patients with AF.MethodsWe comprehensively searched the databases of MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception to December 2020. Included studies were published randomized control trials that compared video‐assisted thoracoscopic and catheter radiofrequency pulmonary vein ablation. Data from each study were combined using the fixed‐effects, generic inverse variance method of DerSimonian, and Laird to calculate odds ratios and 95% confidence intervals.ResultsSix studies from November 2013 to 2020 were included in this meta‐analysis involving 511 AF patients (79% paroxysmal) with 263 catheter ablation (mean age 56 ± 3 years) and 248 surgical ablations (mean age 52 ± 4 years). Catheter ablation was associated with increased atrial arrhythmias recurrence when compared to surgical ablation (pooled relative risk = 1.85, 95% confidence interval: 1.44−2.39, p < .001, I2 = 0.0%) but associated with less total major adverse events (pooled relative risk = 0.29, 95% confidence interval: 0.16−0.53, p < .001, I2 = 0.0%). In subgroup analysis, catheter ablation was associated with increased AF recurrence in refractory paroxysmal AF when compared to surgical ablation (pooled relative risk = 2.47, 95% confidence interval: 1.31−4.65, p = .005, I2 = 0.0%) but not in persistent AF (relative risk = 1.09, 95% confidence interval: 0.60−2.0, p = .773).ConclusionCatheter ablation was associated with higher atrial arrhythmia recurrence when compared with surgical ablation. However, our study suggests that the benefit of surgical ablation in patients with persistent AF is unclear. More studies and alternative ablation strategies investigation in persistent AF are warranted.

AbstractBackgroundPosterior wall isolation (PWI) is an emerging approach in atrial fibrillation (AF) ablation, yet its efficacy remains controversial. This is the first meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCT) to evaluate the efficacy of PWI in AF ablation.ObjectiveTo assess the efficacy of PWI in reducing atrial arrhythmia recurrence following initial AF ablation at long‐term follow‐ups when compared to conventional methods.MethodsWe conducted a literature search from inception through September 2021 in EMBASE and MEDLINE databases. We included RCTs that compared outcomes in PWI and conventional approaches of AF ablation. Data from each study were combined using the random‐effects, generic inverse variance method of DerSimonian and Laird to calculate odds ratio (OR), and 95% confidence interval (CI).ResultsEight RCT from 2009 to 2020, including 1024 AF patients, were included. PWI did not decrease overall atrial arrhythmias recurrence (RR 0.96, 95% CI:0.88–1.05, I2 = 31.6%, p‐value 0.393). However, the pooled analysis showed a significant decrease in AF recurrence in PWI compared to controlled approaches (RR 0.88, 95% CI:0.81–0.96, I2 = 48.2%, p‐value .004). In the subgroup analysis, PWI significantly decreased AF recurrence in the studies that included only persistent AF (RR = 0.89, 95% CI:0.80–0.98, I2 = 65.2%, p‐value .014). PWI significantly decreased AF recurrence when compared to PVI with roof line (RR 0.84, 95% CI 0.74–0.95, I2 0.00%, p‐value .008).ConclusionOur study suggests that adding PWI significantly decreased AF recurrence in patients with persistent AF compared to controlled approaches. It highlights the importance of considering PWI during the initial procedure in this patient population.

AbstractBackgroundRadiofrequency catheter ablation for cardiac arrhythmias has traditionally been guided by fluoroscopy. Fluoroscopy exposes the patient, operator, and staff to ionizing radiation which has no safe dose void of stochastic and deterministic biologic risks. Zero fluoroscopy (ZF) approaches for catheter ablation have been advocated to eliminate these risks. We conducted a meta‐analysis comparing acute procedure success, recurrence‐free survival, complications, and procedure times between the approaches.MethodsWe conducted a literature search from inception through December 2020 in the databases of EMBASE and MEDLINE. We included randomized controlled trials and cohorts that compared the outcomes of interest in ZF and conventional/low fluoroscopy (CF/LF) approaches. The outcomes sought were acute procedure success, recurrence‐free survival, complications, and procedure times. Effect estimates were combined, using the random‐effects, generic inverse variance method of DerSimonian and Laird.ResultsSixteen studies from 2013 to 2020, including 6052 patients (2219 ZF, 3833 CF/LF) were included. There were no significant differences in acute procedure success rate (odds ratio [OR]: 1.10, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.75–1.59), recurrence‐free survival (OR: 1.08, 95% CI: 0.78–1.49), periprocedural complication rate (OR: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.45–1.16), or total procedure time (weighted mean difference 2.32 min, 95% CI: −2.85–7.50) between ZF and CF/LF approaches, respectively. Overall, only 1.26% of patients crossed over from ZF to CF/LF arm.ConclusionsPeriprocedural and postprocedural outcomes with a ZF approach compared favorably with traditional fluoroscopic guidance without increasing procedural times. As comfort with ZF grows, coupled with evolving mapping technologies, this method has potential to become the standard approach for catheter ablation.

Background Brugada syndrome is an inherited cardiac channelopathy associated with major arrhythmic events (MAEs). The presence of a positive family history of sudden cardiac death (SCD) as a risk predictor of MAE remains controversial. We aimed to examine the association between family history of SCD and MAEs stratified by age of SCD with a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Methods and Results We searched the databases of MEDLINE and EMBASE from January 1992 to January 2020. Data from each study were combined using the random‐effects model. Fitted metaregression was performed to evaluate the association between the age of SCD in families and the risk of MAE. Twenty‐two studies from 2004 to 2019 were included in this meta‐analysis involving 3386 patients with Brugada syndrome. The overall family history of SCD was not associated with increased risk of MAE in Brugada syndrome (pooled odds ratio [OR], 1.11; 95% CI, 0.82–1.51; P =0.489, I 2 =45.0%). However, a history of SCD in family members of age younger than 40 years of age did increase the risk of MAE by ≈2‐fold (pooled OR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.11–3.73; P =0.022, I 2 =0.0%). When stratified by the age of cut point at 50, 45, 40, and 35 years old, a history of SCD in younger family member was significantly associated with a higher risk of MAE (pooled OR, 0.49, 1.30, 1.51, and 2.97, respectively; P =0.046). Conclusions A history of SCD among family members of age younger than 40 years was associated with a higher risk of MAE.

Background: Although high power, shorter duration (HPSD) ablation and low power, longer duration (LPLD) ablation strategies for atrial fibrillation (AF) are frequently advocated to enhance safety and efficacy, there exists a need for comparative data from large populations. We performed a meta-analysis to compare arrhythmia-free survival, procedure time and complications rates between the two strategies. Methods: We searched the databases of MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception to April 2020. Included studies were case-control studies, cohort studies, or randomized controlled trials that compared patients undergoing HPSD and LPLD strategies for AF ablation and reported either of the following outcomes: freedom from atrial tachyarrhythmia (AT) including AF and atrial flutter, procedure time, or periprocedural complications. Data from each study were combined using the random-effects model to calculate odds ratio (OR) and weighted mean difference (WMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI). Results: Ten studies from 2006 to 2020 involving 2,189 patients were included (1,350 patients underwent HPSD strategy and 839 patients underwent LPLD strategy). Both HPSD and LPLD strategies resulted in a similar freedom from AT at 12-month follow-up (OR=1.36, 95% CI:0.91-2.04, p=0.13, Figure 1A). HPSD strategy did result in a significant reduction in total procedure time (WMD=47.34, 95% CI:29.47-65.21, p<0.001, Figure 1B) compared to LPSD. HPSD wasn’t associated with reduction in esophageal ulcer/arterioesophageal fistula (OR=0.35, 95%CI=0.12-1.06, p=0.06) or pericardial effusion/cardiac tamponade (OR=0.96, 95%CI: 0.24-3.79, p=0.95) Conclusions: In this large meta-analysis both LPLD and HPSD are equally effective and safe. Although HPSD is often advocated to reduce esophageal injury, risk was similar between approaches. However, HPSD strategy significantly lowers procedure times.

AbstractIntroductionBrugada syndrome (BrS) is associated with ventricular arrhythmia leading to sudden cardiac death. Risk stratification is challenging, as major arrhythmic events (MAEs) are rare. We assessed the utility of drug challenge testing in BrS by a systematic review and meta‐analysis.Methods and ResultsWe comprehensively searched the databases of MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception to May 2019. Included studies compared the incidence of MAE between spontaneous and drug challenge–induced Type 1. Mixed‐effects Poisson regression was used to calculate the incidence rate ratio (IRR). Eighteen studies from 2006 to 2018 were included (4099 patients, mean follow‐up: 4.5 years). Pooled annual incidences of MAE in spontaneous, drug challenge induced (regardless of symptoms), asymptomatic drug challenge induced, and symptomatic drug challenge–induced Type 1 were 23.8 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 19.8–27.8), 6.5 (95% CI: 3.9–9.1), 2.1 (95% CI: −0.3 to 4.4), and 19.6 (95% CI: 9.9–29.3) per 1000 person‐years, respectively. The incidence of MAE between symptomatic drug challenge induced and asymptomatic spontaneous Type 1 was not statistically different (IRR = 1.0; 95% CI: 0.6–1.7).ConclusionsThe incidence of MAE in drug challenge–induced Type 1 in asymptomatic patients is low. The incidence of MAE between symptomatic drug challenge induced and asymptomatic spontaneous Type 1 was similar.

Introduction: Brugada syndrome is associated with ventricular arrhythmia leading to sudden cardiac death. Risk stratification is challenging, as major arrhythmic events (MAE) are rare. We assessed the utility of drug challenge testing in Brugada syndrome by a systematic review and meta-analysis. Methods and results: We comprehensively searched the databases of MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception to May 2019. Included studies compared the incidence of MAE between spontaneous and drug challenge induced Type-1. Data were combined using the random-effects, generic inverse variance method, to calculate pooled incidence and odds ratio (OR). Mixed-effects Poisson regression was used to calculated incidence rate ratio (IRR). Eighteen studies from 2006 to 2018 were included (4,099 patients, mean follow-up 4.5 years). Pooled annual incidences of MAE in spontaneous, drug challenge induced (regardless of symptoms), asymptomatic drug challenge induced, and symptomatic drug challenge induced Type-1 were 23.8 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 19.8-27.8), 6.5 (95% CI: 3.9-9.1), 2.1 (95% CI: -0.3-4.4), and 19.6 (95% CI: 9.9-29.3) per 1,000 person-years respectively. The incidence of MAE between symptomatic drug challenge induced and asymptomatic spontaneous Type-1 was not statistically different (IRR=1.0, 95%CI: 0.6-1.7). The presence of ventricular tachyarrhythmia during drug challenge testing was a predictor of MAE (OR=3.73, 95% CI: 1.77-7.86, p=0.001). Conclusions: The incidence of MAE in drug challenge induced Type-1 in asymptomatic patients is low. The incidence of MAE between symptomatic drug challenge induced and asymptomatic spontaneous Type-1 was similar. Ventricular tachyarrhythmia during drug challenge testing could be a useful risk marker for MAE in Brugada syndrome.

AbstractBackgroundBrugada syndrome (BrS) is an inherited arrhythmic disease associated with an increased risk of major arrhythmic events (MAE). Previous studies reported that a wide QRS complex may be useful as a predictor of MAE in BrS patients. We aimed to assess the correlation of wide QRS complex with MAE by a systematic review and meta‐analysis.MethodsWe comprehensively searched the databases of MEDLINE and EMBASE from inception to June 2019. Included studies were cohort and case control studies that reported QRS duration and the relationship between wide QRS complex (>120 milliseconds) and MAE (sudden cardiac death, sudden cardiac arrest, ventricular fibrillation, sustained ventricular tachycardia, or appropriate shock). Data from each study were combined using the random‐effects model.ResultsTwenty‐two studies from 2007 to 2018 were included in this meta‐analysis involving 4,814 BrS patients. The mean age was 46.1 ± 12.8 years. The patients were predominately men (77.6%). Wide QRS duration was an independent predictor of MAE (pooled risk ratio 1.55, 95% confidence interval: 1.04‐2.30, P = .30, I2 = 38.4%). QRS duration was wider in BrS who had history of MAE (weight mean difference = 8.12 milliseconds, 95% confidence interval: 5.75‐10.51 milliseconds).ConclusionsOur study demonstrated that QRS duration is wider in BrS who had history of MAE, and a wide QRS complex is associated with 1.55 times higher risk of MAE in BrS populations. Wide QRS complex can be considered for risk stratification in prediction of MAE in patients with BrS, especially when considering implantable cardioverter‐defibrillator placement in asymptomatic patients.