Comparison of Ajmaline and Procainamide Provocation Tests in the Diagnosis of Brugada Syndrome.

Authors:
Christopher C Cheung
Christopher C Cheung
University of British Columbia
Vancouver | Canada
Greg Mellor
Greg Mellor
St. George's University of London
United Kingdom
Marc W Deyell
Marc W Deyell
University of British Columbia
Canada
Bode Ensam
Bode Ensam
Cardiology Clinical Academic Group
Velislav Batchvarov
Velislav Batchvarov
St. George's Hospital Medical School
United Kingdom
Michael Papadakis
Michael Papadakis
St George's University of London
United Kingdom
Jason D Roberts
Jason D Roberts
University of Ottawa Heart Institute
Canada
Richard Leather
Richard Leather
Royal Jubilee Hospital
Belfast | United Kingdom

JACC Clin Electrophysiol 2019 Apr 27;5(4):504-512. Epub 2019 Mar 27.

Division of Cardiology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. Electronic address:

Objectives: The authors studied the response rates and relative sensitivity of the most common agents used in the sodium-channel blocker (SCB) challenge.

Background: A type 1 Brugada electrocardiographic pattern precipitated by an SCB challenge confers a diagnosis of Brugada syndrome.

Methods: Patients undergoing an SCB challenge were prospectively enrolled across Canada and the United Kingdom. Patients with no prior cardiac arrest and family histories of sudden cardiac death or Brugada syndrome were included.

Results: Four hundred twenty-five subjects underwent SCB challenge (ajmaline, n = 331 [78%]; procainamide, n = 94 [22%]), with a mean age of 39 ± 15 years (54% men). Baseline non-type 1 Brugada ST-segment elevation was present in 10%. A total of 154 patients (36%) underwent signal-averaged electrocardiography, with 41% having late potentials. Positive results were seen more often with ajmaline than procainamide infusion (26% vs. 4%, p < 0.001). On multivariate analysis, baseline non-type 1 Brugada ST-segment elevation (odds ratio [OR]: 6.92; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 3.15 to 15.2; p < 0.001) and ajmaline use (OR: 8.76; 95% CI: 2.62 to 29.2; p < 0.001) were independent predictors of positive results to SCB challenge. In the subgroup undergoing signal-averaged electrocardiography, non-type 1 Brugada ST-segment elevation (OR: 9.28; 95% CI: 2.22 to 38.8; p = 0.002), late potentials on signal-averaged electrocardiography (OR: 4.32; 95% CI: 1.50 to 12.5; p = 0.007), and ajmaline use (OR: 12.0; 95% CI: 2.45 to 59.1; p = 0.002) were strong predictors of SCB outcome.

Conclusions: The outcome of SCB challenge was significantly affected by the drug used, with ajmaline more likely to provoke a type 1 Brugada electrocardiographic pattern compared with procainamide. Patients undergoing SCB challenge may have contrasting results depending on the drug used, with potential clinical, psychosocial, and socioeconomic implications.

Download full-text PDF

Source
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jacep.2019.01.026DOI Listing
April 2019
12 Reads

Article Mentions


Provided by Crossref Event Data
twitter
Twitter:
April 1, 2019, 7:41 pm EST
twitter
Twitter:
April 1, 2019, 6:42 pm EST

Publication Analysis

Top Keywords

scb challenge
24
st-segment elevation
12
signal-averaged electrocardiography
12
non-type brugada
12
brugada st-segment
12
p < 0001
12
brugada syndrome
8
late potentials
8
electrocardiographic pattern
8
ajmaline procainamide
8
scb
8
diagnosis brugada
8
baseline non-type
8
brugada electrocardiographic
8
patients undergoing
8
undergoing scb
8
brugada
8
type brugada
8
challenge
6
95%
5

Similar Publications