Next Article in Journal
Clinical, Imaging, and Serum Biomarker Predictors of Malignant Cerebral Infarction
Previous Article in Journal
The Glymphatic System and Diaphragmatic Dysfunction in Patients with Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease and Chronic Heart Failure: The Importance of Inspiratory Rehabilitation Training
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
JCDD
Volume 12
Issue 10
10.3390/jcdd12100391
jcdd-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Systematic Review

Impact of Atrial Fibrillation on the Outcome of Patients with Brugada Syndrome: A Meta-Analysis

by
Max Aboutorabi
1,
Mahmood Ahmad
2,
Jonathan J. H. Bray
3,
Daniel A. Gomes
4 and
Rui Providencia
5,*
1
University College London Medical School, Faculty of Medical Sciences, University College London, 74 Huntley St, London WC1E 6DE, UK
2
Department of Cardiology, Royal Free Hospital, Pond Street, London NW3 2QG, UK
3
Institute of Life Sciences 2, Swansea Bay University Health Board and Swansea University Medical School, Swansea SA2 8PP, UK
4
Department of Cardiology, Hospital De Santa Cruz, Av. Prof. Dr. Reinaldo dos Santos, 2790-134 Carnaxide, Portugal
5
Institute of Health Informatics Research, University College London, 222 Euston Road, London NW1 2DA, UK
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
J. Cardiovasc. Dev. Dis. 2025, 12(10), 391; https://doi.org/10.3390/jcdd12100391
Submission received: 13 June 2025 / Revised: 14 September 2025 / Accepted: 16 September 2025 / Published: 3 October 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Atrial Fibrillation: Risk Stratification, Epidemiology, Treatment Advances and Prognostic Interventions)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

Introduction: Atrial fibrillation (AF) is common in patients with Brugada syndrome (BrS). The impact and significance of AF in this patient population needs to be further clarified. Method: We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies comparing the risks of developing major arrhythmic events (MAEs) in patients with BrS with and without AF. Databases including MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL were searched from inception to July 2024, using appropriate search and MeSH terms. Data were sought on the comparison of patients with BrS with and without AF. The protocol was specified prior to the searches being performed, and standard meta-analytic techniques were used. Results: Thirteen observational studies were included (a total of 5413 patients). A significant increase in MAEs was observed in patients with both BrS and AF (20.6% vs. 7.8%; OR 2.81, 95% CI 1.82–4.34; p < 0.0001; I2 = 46%). Significantly higher rates of syncope (33.3% vs. 23.4%; OR 1.97, 95% CI 1.04–3.76; p = 0.04, I2 = 59%) and a significant increase in all-cause mortality (11.3% vs. 3.7%; OR 4.21, 95% CI 1.69–10.45; p = 0.002, I2 = 0%) and sodium channel mutations (43.1% vs. 29.9%; OR 1.87, 95% CI 1.07–3.29; p = 0.028, I2 = 0%) were observed for patients with BrS and AF. Conclusions: Patients with both BrS and AF seem to have a more severe disease phenotype. More research into the added role of AF in risk stratification of asymptomatic BrS patients is needed, but the prognostic implications of AF may need to be considered when developing future personalised medicine approaches in the BrS population.

1. Introduction

Brugada syndrome (BrS) is an inherited cardiac condition, first described by Josep and Pedro Brugada, characterised by right bundle branch block and ST-segment elevation in leads V1–V3 that increases a patient’s risk of ventricular arrhythmias [1,2]. BrS has an estimated prevalence of one in two thousand, with an increased incidence in the southeast Asian population, and is a leading cause of sudden cardiac death in young, healthy adults [3].
The occurrence of atrial fibrillation (AF) in patients with BrS is higher than in the general population, ranging from 6 to 59% percent [4,5]. AF in the general population increases the risk of stroke, all-cause mortality [6,7], sudden cardiac death (SCD) [8], and other adverse events [9]. Both BrS and AF share mutations in sodium channel function, which may predispose to increased risks of arrhythmias [4]. Knowledge on the impact of AF in the BrS population is still sparse, and a better understanding of it may be of importance for helping the clinicians who manage these patients.
Currently, there is minimal guidance on how to manage patients with concurrent BrS and AF. The gold-standard treatment for patients with BrS is implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICDs); however, these are only used after assessing a patient’s risk of developing a fatal arrythmia such as VT or VF [10]. Currently, most risk scores do not include concurrent AF as a risk factor [11]. It remains unclear whether concurrent AF increases the risk of fatal arrhythmia in patients with Brugada syndrome.
We aimed to systematically assess the impact of AF in patients with BrS.

2. Materials and Methods

We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis of studies enrolling patients with BrS and compared them to patients with BrS and AF in terms of clinical events and genetic background. The review protocol was registered on PROSPERO [12], and the review was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. We did not access or process any patient-identifiable data. Hence, no ethical review or approval was required.

2.1. Search Strategy

Searches were run via Ovid MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials from inception to July 2024, using relevant search terms (“Brugada syndrome”, “atrial fibrillation”, “ventricular fibrillation”, “ventricular tachycardia”, “sudden cardiac death”, “major arrhythmic event”), MeSH terms, and keywords (Annex A in Supplementary Materials). Two reviewers (MAb and MAh) independently screened titles for relevance and then assessed the full texts for their eligibility.

2.2. Eligibility Criteria and Population

Studies were considered eligible if they included patients diagnosed with BrS and information on presence/absence of AF. No constraints were set in terms of type of AF. Furthermore, there were no constraints in terms of age, co-morbidities, or any other factors. Studies of patient cohorts implanted with an ICD were excluded.

2.3. Outcomes of Interest

The composite primary endpoint of major arrhythmic events (MAEs) was defined as any occurrence of ventricular fibrillation, ventricular tachycardia, sudden cardiac death, and sudden cardiac arrest. Secondary outcomes included syncope, all-cause mortality, and presence of sodium channel mutations.

2.4. Data Extraction

The data was extracted onto a pre-made Excel spreadsheet (Office 365, Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, WA, USA) with subheadings for ‘study, number of patients with AF present, number of patients with AF not present, events in patients with AF, events in patients without AF’. The population characteristics were also recorded on an Excel spreadsheet and this included age, percentage of males, BrS type, AF prevalence, follow-up period, country, MAE definition, and type of study (Table 1). Finally, the study type was recorded on the same spreadsheet including the country of the study and if it was single- or multi-centred.

2.5. Statistical Analysis

Odds ratios, with 95% confidence intervals, were used as the effect measure. A random-effects model was chosen to account for heterogeneity. The statistical analysis was performed using R (version 4.4.3) (‘meta’ package), with Mantel–Haenszel analysis to create the forest plots [13]. Heterogeneity was assessed using I2, and variance (tau2) was calculated using the Paule–Mandel model [14].

2.6. Sensitivity Analysis

When in the presence of high heterogeneity (I2 > 50%), we excluded one study at a time, attempting to detect the potential source of heterogeneity.

2.7. Risk of Bias Assessment

The quality of the included papers was assessed using the Newcastle–Ottawa scale (NOS) [15]. This was performed by assessing the selection, comparability, and outcomes of the individual studies, with a maximum score of 4, 2, and 3 in each section, respectively. The scoring was completed by 2 reviewers (MAb and JJHB), and disagreements were resolved by consensus.
Table 1. Table of baseline characteristics of the patients and study details.
Table 1. Table of baseline characteristics of the patients and study details.
StudyTakagi 2007 [16]Kusano 2008
[17]		Cabanelas 2013
[18]		Giustetto 2014 [19]Calò 2016
[20]		Tokioka 2017
[21]		Asmundis 2017
[22]		Sieira 2017 [23]Tse 2020
[24]		Honarbakhsh 2021 [25]Migliore 2022 [26]Gaita 2023 [27]Kamakura 2024 [28]
Characteristic+AF−AF+AF−AF+AF−AF+AF−AF+AF−AF+AF−AF+AF−AF+AF−AF+AF−AF+AF−AF+AF−AF+AF−AF+AF−AF
Study designProspective cohortProspective cohortProspective cohortProspective cohortProspective cohortRetrospective cohortRetrospective cohortProspective cohortRetrospective cohortRetrospective cohortRetrospective cohortProspective cohortProspective cohort
CountryJapanJapanN/AItalyItalyJapanBelgiumBrusselsHong KongInternationalItaly & BelgiumItalyJapan
Single/MulticentreMulticentreSingle centreN/AMulti centreMulti centreSingle centreSingle centreSingle centreMulticentreMulticentreMulticentreMulticentreMulticentre
No. patients32156106314264485121832944202312583134914261791031258018113168345
Age (years)534943.7Group 1–47
Group 2–59
Group 3–44		4547.64541.15351.8454550.9
Male (%)94.798.6N/A75.778.495.970.258.39071.8757495.6
Brugada typeSpontaneous or drug-induced type 1Spontaneous or drug-induced type 1N/ASpontaneous or drug-induced type 1Spontaneous type 1Spontaneous or drug-induced type 1Spontaneous or drug-induced type 1Spontaneous or drug-induced type 1Spontaneous or fever-induced type 1Spontaneous or drug-induced type 1Spontaneous or drug-induced type 1Spontaneous or drug-induced type 1Spontaneous or drug-induced type 1
AF type prevalence (%)Paroxysmal 17%Paroxysmal 13.7%N/APersistent & paroxysmal 9%Persistent and paroxysmal 5.2%Paroxysmal 17.9%Paroxysmal 10.7%N/AParoxysmal, persistent & permanent 5%N/AParoxysmal 24%N/AN/A
MAE definitionVF and SCDVFVF/polymorphic VTSCD, VF, and appropriate shockSCD, aborted SCD, VF, and sVTSCD, VF, and appropriate shockSCD and appropriate shockSCDVT and VFSCD, VT, and VFVT and VFSCD, VT, and VFVF
Follow-up period (months)Mean 37 ± 16N/AMean 59.3 ± 49.4Median
Group 1–46
Group 2–68
Group 3–41		Mean 48 ± 38.6Mean 45.1 ± 44.3Mean 120 ± 55.7Mean 80.7 ± 57.2Median 67 (31–113)Median 63.96 ± 48Median 155 (128–181)Median 72 (48–108)106.8 ± 66.1

3. Results

3.1. Characteristics of Included Studies

Our searches identified 1504 potentially relevant records. After removing duplicates, 1231 records were screened. After analysing the title and abstracts, the full text was retrieved for 18 records. In the end, 13 studies, including a total of 5413 patients, met the inclusion criteria for this review (Figure 1) [16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28]. The excluded studies and the reason for exclusion are presented in Table S2 [29,30,31,32,33].
The studies consisted of both retrospective and prospective cohort studies. In total, 432 patients suffered from both BrS and AF and 4981 patients suffered only from BrS.

3.2. Study Appraisal

Assessment with the NOS showed that nine studies were considered of a high quality, two were moderate, and two were of a low quality (Table S1; Supplementary Materials).

3.3. Meta-Analysis of Extracted Data

An increased rate of MAEs was observed for patients with BrS and AF compared to patients with BrS alone (20.6% vs. 7.8%; OR 2.81, 95% CI 1.82–4.34; p < 0.0001; 13 studies). The data had moderate heterogeneity (I2 = 46%) (Figure 2). On removal of the Honarbakhsh 2021 study [25] and the de Asmundis 2017 study [22], the heterogeneity dropped to 22.5% and 29.7%, respectively. The results of the leave-one-out analysis can be found in the Supplementary Materials (Table S4).
When pooling all of the available data, significant differences in the occurrence of syncope were observed with more events in patients with BrS with AF when compared to BrS without AF (33.3% vs. 23.4%; OR 1.97, 95% CI 1.04–3.76; p = 0.04; 7 studies) (Figure 3). There was high heterogeneity for this pooled analysis (I2 = 59%), and on removal of the outlier, Giustetto 2014 [19], syncope remained significantly associated with MAEs (OR 2.80, 95% CI 1.66–4.70; p < 0.01). Very low heterogeneity was observed (I2 = 0%) for this sensitivity analysis (Table S5).
Two studies reported on the association of AF with all-cause mortality [18,19]. Pooling these data suggested that patients with BrS and AF showed higher mortality than patients with BrS alone (11.3% vs. 3.7%; OR 4.21, 95% CI 1.69–10.45; p = 0.002) (Figure 4A). The studies showed no heterogeneity (I2 = 0%).
Patients with BrS and AF seemed to be more likely to have SCN5a-SCN1b mutations compared to patients with BrS alone (43.1% vs. 29.9%; OR 1.87, 95% CI 1.07–3.29; p = 0.028; 2 studies) (Figure 4B). The studies showed no heterogeneity (I2 = 0%).

4. Discussion

We evaluated the presence of AF as a predictor of clinical events in patients with BrS. The results showed that in patients with BrS, concurrent AF is associated with an increased risk of MAEs. Of the thirteen studies included, Asmundis 2017 [22] and Honarbakhsh 2021 [25] were the only studies that whose effect estimate suggested negative, or lack of, association between patients with BrS and AF and developing MAEs [22]. All of the other studies showed a positive association between AF and MAE [16,17,18,19,20,21,23,24,26,27,28]. These findings aligned with the findings of a previous meta-analysis [34].
When assessing the secondary outcomes, AF was significantly associated with increased rate of syncope and with higher mortality rate during follow-up. These findings suggest that the presence of AF in patients with BrS may potentially be considered a higher risk feature. However, there is uncertainty on whether or not, and in which setting, AF adds incremental risk to other known risk features.

4.1. AF Occurrence

Studies have shown broad differences in the reported prevalence of AF in patients with BrS [35,36,37], with most showing a higher prevalence of AF in BrS compared to the general population [38]. Due to the potential prognosis implications of AF in this patient group, it is possible that individuals with BrS may need closer monitoring and screening for AF.
Additionally, the type of AF varied across the studies between paroxysmal, persistent, and unreported. It is possible that the type of AF may result in different rates of arrhythmic events and other secondary outcomes. Research has shown that non-paroxysmal AF is associated with higher risks of death and other significant outcomes [39].

4.2. Clinical Implications

After a diagnosis of BrS, the main clinical challenge is to risk stratify and identify patients who are at risk for potential MAE [10]. Currently, patients with BrS who had aborted sudden cardiac death and patients with spontaneous type 1 BrS ECG and cardiac syncope are the ones who are at a higher risk of MAEs [40]. Hence, these two groups patients have an indication for an ICD: class I for the former (secondary prevention) and class IIa for the latter (primary prevention) [41].
The risk of MAEs in patients with spontaneous type 1 Brugada ECG and no symptoms is thought to be 0.5 to 1.0% annually [2,42]. Even though this may seem a low risk at first glance, as most of these patients are young adults, over a lifetime horizon, the true magnitude of risk may be considerable. Hence, more accurate risk stratification is required for identifying those at very low risk, who will have no events, and those with higher chances of MAEs at some point. More risk factors are needed to help clinicians better characterise the risk spectrum. Various risk scores (e.g., BRUGADA-RISK, PAT, Shangai Score System, Sieira et al. [23]), and combinations of multiple risk factors have been proposed for this population [25,43,44,45] (Table S3). Among these, the Shangai Score System includes AF or atrial flutter below the age of 30 as a risk factor [44], and in Sieira et al., only a trend was observed for a potential association between AF and MAE, which resulted in AF not being included in the final model [23]. However, incorporating AF into risk stratification scores must be performed with caution, as the reported prevalence of concurrent AF in patients with BrS ranges from 6 to 59% [4,5]. This means that the addition of AF into risk scores could potentially lead to a large increase in patients deemed eligible for an ICD. This would not only increase healthcare costs but also put more patients at risk of having side effects, such as inappropriate shocks, from a potentially unnecessary ICD. Therefore, future research assessing the incremental role of AF added to traditional risk factors is warranted. On the other hand, the presence of AF also needs to be accounted for when discussing potential disadvantages and complications of ICD therapy with patients, as AF is a common cause of inappropriate ICD shocks, which have an impact on quality of life [43].
Additionally, the management of AF and other supraventricular arrhythmias is complex to manage in patients with BrS. This is due to the contraindications of certain anti-arrhythmic drugs, used to treat AF, in patients with BrS [46]. Furthermore, the presence of AF has been shown to increase the rates of inappropriate shocks from an ICD in patients with BrS [47].
Another option for the treatment of AF in patients with BrS is catheter ablation, particularly pulmonary vein isolation. Studies have shown that ablation in this population has been shown to reduce AF recurrences and decrease the need for inappropriate ICD intervention [48]. Furthermore, it decreases the risk of inappropriate ICD shocks, which can occur when atrial arrhythmias are misinterpreted as ventricular arrhythmias [49]. The most common methods for this are radiofrequency ablation, cryoballon ablation and, more recently, pulsed-field ablation [50]. When comparing the three methods, none has demonstrated overall superiority; however, the use of pulmonary vein isolation has shown to be less successful at preventing recurrences in patients with BrS than those without [47].

4.3. Genetics

We observed a significant increase in the rate of SCN5a-SCN1b mutations in patients with both BrS and AF. The SCN5A gene encodes for the pore-forming ion-conducting a-subunit of the sodium channels within the cardiac tissue [51]. The SCN1b gene encodes for the Nav-β1 and -β1B subunits and is linked to atrial and ventricular arrhythmias [52].
The sodium channels are then responsible for the depolarisation of atrial, ventricular, and Purkinje fibres, playing a key role in the initiation and propagation of the cardiac action potential. A loss-of-function mutation in the SCN5A gene results in an imbalance between the inward and outward currents during parts of the cardiac cycle, resulting in an abnormal ECG and arrhythmogenic phenotype, as observed in Brugada syndrome. This has been shown to be the most common genetic association for Brugada syndrome, being observed in 15–30% of BrS occurrences [53]. SCN5A variants have also been associated with AF [54]. Studies have shown that effects from the SCN5A mutation lead to a predisposing environment facilitating AF in patients with BrS [55]. This suggests a shared genetic and molecular basis underling the association between BrS and AF.

4.4. Limitations

This systematic review consisted entirely of small observational studies. Heterogeneity was observed for some of the assessed outcomes. We tried to perform sub-analyses and sensitivity analyses to further clarify this. Finally, despite having initially planned to assess the impact of AF in the occurrence of stroke in the BrS population, none of the included studies assessed this endpoint. Due to the young age of patients diagnosed with BrS, reducing the stroke risk via anticoagulation can be clinically challenging due to increased bleeding risk [56]. Therefore, more data is needed to see if traditional risk scores such as CHA2DS2-VASc are appropriate in this patient population.
Additionally, this is a study-level meta-analysis, allowing for no adjustment of covariants for characteristics such as types of AF and type of BrS. Furthermore, the definition of MAEs varies between each study, likely resulting in variation between each patient population. Some studies defined MAEs as VT and VF; some as VT, VF, and SCD; and others as VF alone, while others included inappropriate shocks in their analysis. These variations in the definition of MAEs will likely introduce a level of heterogeneity into the analysis and may affect how the results can be interpreted.
A limitation in our study is the lack of information on strokes as an outcome. Strokes are a major risk in patients with AF and due to the lack of information, we are unable to assess the relationship between the risk of strokes in this patient population, which limits our ability to draw key conclusions on anticoagulation strategies. Furthermore, there was insufficient data to complete a subgroup analysis of the studies.
Some of the studies in this review included retrospective data. This increases the risk of bias such as selection bias and reporting bias. Furthermore, there is variability in the type of Brugada syndrome, including spontaneous and drug-induced, and also variability in the type of AF, including paroxysmal and persistent, which may affect the comparability of the studies.
Finally, it must be noted that AF may not be an independent risk factor. The presence of AF can be associated with other variables, especially genetic factors, making it difficult to draw the conclusion that AF alone is responsible for the observed increased risk.

5. Conclusions

Patients with both BrS and AF seem to have a more severe disease phenotype, with a higher rate of MAEs and mortality. More research into the added role of AF in risk stratification of asymptomatic BrS patients is needed, but the prognostic implications of AF may need to be considered when developing future personalised medicine approaches in the BrS population.

Supplementary Materials

The following supporting information can be downloaded at https://www.mdpi.com/article/10.3390/jcdd12100391/s1. Table S1: Excluded studies and reasons for exclusion [29,30,31,32,33]; Table S2: Newcastle-Ottawa scale results for included studies [16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28]; Table S3: Brugada risk stratification schemes; Table S4: Leave-one-out analysis for major arrhythmic events (I2); Table S5: Leave-one-out analysis for syncope (I2); Annex A: Search Expression.

Author Contributions

Conceptualisation, M.A. (Mahmood Ahmad) and M.A. (Max Aboutorabi); methodology, M.A. (Max Aboutorabi), M.A. (Mahmood Ahmad), J.J.H.B., and R.P.; validation M.A. (Max Aboutorabi), M.A. (Mahmood Ahmad), and R.P.; formal analysis, M.A. (Max Aboutorabi) and M.A. (Mahmood Ahmad); data curation, M.A. (Max Aboutorabi), M.A. (Mahmood Ahmad), R.P., and D.A.G.; writing—original draft preparation, M.A. (Max Aboutorabi); writing—review and editing, M.A. (Mahmood Ahmad), R.P., and J.J.H.B.; visualisation, M.A. (Max Aboutorabi); supervision, R.P. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

This study has been registered with PROSPERO (CRD42024531186). It was conducted using the methodology proposed by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement, and all data used were extracted from individual studies.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

All extracted data from manuscripts are publicly available and have been made available in the tables and plots of the manuscript.

Acknowledgments

We thank Kiran Flora for assisting in the write-up of the protocol and manuscript.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
AFAtrial fibrillation
BrSBrugada syndrome
MAEMajor arrhythmic event
SCDSudden cardiac death

References

  1. Brugada, P.; Brugada, J. Right bundle branch block, persistent ST segment elevation and sudden cardiac death: A distinct clinical and electrocardiographic syndrome. A multicenter report. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 1992, 20, 1391–1396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Probst, V.; Veltmann, C.; Eckardt, L.; Meregalli, P.; Gaita, F.; Tan, H.; Babuty, D.; Sacher, F.; Giustetto, C.; Schulze-Bahr, E.; et al. Long-term prognosis of patients diagnosed with Brugada syndrome: Results from the FINGER Brugada Syndrome Registry. Circulation 2010, 121, 635–643. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  3. Malik, B.R.; Ali Rudwan, A.M.; Abdelghani, M.S.; Meregalli, P.G.; Gaita, F.; Tan, H.L.; Babuty, D.; Sacher, F.; Giustetto, C.; Schulze-Bahr, E.; et al. Brugada Syndrome: Clinical Features, Risk Stratification, and Management. Heart Views 2020, 21, 88–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  4. Francis, J.; Antzelevitch, C. Atrial fibrillation and Brugada syndrome. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2008, 51, 1149–1153. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  5. Lippi, G.; Sanchis-Gomar, F.; Cervellin, G. Global epidemiology of atrial fibrillation: An increasing epidemic and public health challenge. Int. J. Stroke 2021, 16, 217–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  6. Wolf, P.A.; Dawber, T.R.; Thomas, H.E., Jr.; Kannel, W.B. Epidemiologic assessment of chronic atrial fibrillation and risk of stroke: The Framingham study. Neurology 1978, 28, 973–977. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Benjamin, E.J.; Wolf, P.A.; D’Agostino, R.B.; Silbershatz, H.; Kannel, W.B.; Levy, D. Impact of atrial fibrillation on the risk of death: The Framingham Heart Study. Circulation 1998, 98, 946–952. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Chen, L.Y.; Sotoodehnia, N.; Bůžková, P.; Lopez, F.L.; Yee, L.M.; Heckbert, S.R.; Prineas, R.; Soliman, E.Z.; Adabag, S.; Konety, S.; et al. Atrial fibrillation and the risk of sudden cardiac death: The atherosclerosis risk in communities study and cardiovascular health study. JAMA Intern. Med. 2013, 173, 29–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  9. Kim, Y.G.; Choi, Y.Y.; Han, K.D.; Min, K.; Choi, H.Y.; Shim, J.; Choi, J.-I.; Kim, Y.-H. Atrial fibrillation is associated with increased risk of lethal ventricular arrhythmias. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 18111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  10. Gourraud, J.B.; Barc, J.; Thollet, A.; Le Marec, H.; Probst, V. Brugada syndrome: Diagnosis, risk stratification and management. Arch. Cardiovasc. Dis. 2017, 110, 188–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  11. Lee, S.; Zhou, J.; Chung, C.T.; Lee, R.O.Y.; Bazoukis, G.; Letsas, K.P.; Wong, W.T.; Wong, I.C.K.; Mok, N.S.; Liu, T.; et al. Comparing the Performance of Published Risk Scores in Brugada Syndrome: A Multi-center Cohort Study. Curr. Probl. Cardiol. 2022, 47, 101381. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  12. Aboutorabi, M.; Ahmad, M.; Flora, K.; Da Providencia E Costa, R.B. Impact of Atrial Fibrillation on the Outcome of Patients with Brugada Syndrome: A Meta-Analysis. PROSPERO 2024. CRD42024531186. Available online: https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42024531186 (accessed on 1 September 2025).
  13. Efthimiou, O.; Rücker, G.; Schwarzer, G.; Higgins, J.P.; Egger, M.; Salanti, G. Network meta-analysis of rare events using the Mantel-Haenszel method. Stat. Med. 2019, 38, 2992–3012. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  14. Jackson, D.; Veroniki, A.A.; Law, M.; Tricco, A.C.; Baker, R. Paule-Mandel estimators for network meta-analysis with random inconsistency effects. Res. Synth. Methods 2017, 8, 416–434. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Wells, G.; Brodsky, L.; O’Connell, D.; Shea, B.; Henry, D.; Mayank, S.; Tugwell, P. An evaluation of the Newcastle Ottawa Scale: An assessment tool for evaluating the quality of non-randomized studies. In Proceedings of the XI Cochrane Colloquium: Evidence, Health Care and Culture, Barcelona, Spain, 26–31 October 2003. [Google Scholar]
  16. Takagi, M.; Yokoyama, Y.; Aonuma, K.; Aihara, N.; Hiraoka, M.; Japan Idiopathic Ventricular Fibrillation Study (J-IVFS) Investigators. Clinical characteristics and risk stratification in symptomatic and asymptomatic patients with brugada syndrome: Multicenter study in Japan. J. Cardiovasc. Electrophysiol. 2007, 18, 1244–1251. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Kusano, K.F.; Taniyama, M.; Nakamura, K.; Miura, D.; Banba, K.; Nagase, S.; Morita, H.; Nishii, N.; Watanabe, A.; Tada, T.; et al. Atrial fibrillation in patients with Brugada syndrome relationships of gene mutation, electrophysiology, and clinical backgrounds. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2008, 51, 1169–1175. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  18. Cabanelas, N.; Arbelo, E.; Berne, P.; Tolosana, J.M.; Berruezo, A.; Mont, L.; Brugada, J. Atrial fibrillation as a marker of clinical severity in brugada syndrome. Eur. Heart J. 2013, 34 (Suppl. S1), P2312. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Giustetto, C.; Cerrato, N.; Gribaudo, E.; Scrocco, C.; Castagno, D.; Richiardi, E.; Giachino, D.; Bianchi, F.; Barbonaglia, L.; Ferraro, A.; et al. Atrial fibrillation in a large population with Brugada electrocardiographic pattern: Prevalence, management, and correlation with prognosis. Heart Rhythm 2014, 11, 259–265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  20. Calò, L.; Giustetto, C.; Martino, A.; Sciarra, L.; Cerrato, N.; Marziali, M.; Rauzino, J.; Carlino, G.; de Ruvo, E.; Guerra, F.; et al. A New Electrocardiographic Marker of Sudden Death in Brugada Syndrome: The S-Wave in Lead I. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2016, 67, 1427–1440. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  21. Tokioka, K.; Kusano, K.F.; Morita, H.; Miura, D.; Nishii, N.; Nagase, S.; Nakamura, K.; Kohno, K.; Ito, H.; Ohe, T. Electrocardiographic parameters and fatal arrhythmic events in patients with Brugada syndrome: Combination of depolarization and repolarization abnormalities. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2014, 63, 2131–2138. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  22. de Asmundis, C.; Mugnai, G.; Chierchia, G.B.; Sieira, J.; Conte, G.; Rodriguez-Mañero, M.; Pappaert, G.; Czapla, J.; Nijs, J.; La Meir, M.; et al. Long-Term Follow-Up of Probands with Brugada Syndrome. Am. J. Cardiol. 2017, 119, 1392–1400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Sieira, J.; Conte, G.; Ciconte, G.; Chierchia, G.-B.; Casado-Arroyo, R.; Baltogiannis, G.; Di Giovanni, G.; Saitoh, Y.; Juliá, J.; Mugnai, G.; et al. A score model to predict risk of events in patients with Brugada Syndrome. Eur. Heart J. 2017, 38, 1756–1763. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Tse, G.; Lee, S.; Mok, N.S.; Liu, T.; Chang, D. Incidence and predictors of atrial fibrillation in a Chinese cohort of Brugada syndrome. Int. J. Cardiol. 2020, 314, 54–57. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Honarbakhsh, S.; Providencia, R.; Garcia-Hernandez, J.; Martin, C.A.; Hunter, R.J.; Lim, W.Y.; Kirkby, C.; Graham, A.J.; Sharifzadehgan, A.; Waldmann, V.; et al. A Primary Prevention Clinical Risk Score Model for Patients with Brugada Syndrome (BRUGADA-RISK). JACC Clin. Electrophysiol. 2021, 7, 210–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  26. Migliore, F.; Martini, N.; Calo’, L.; Martino, A.; Winnicki, G.; Vio, R.; Condello, C.; Rizzo, A.; Zorzi, A.; Pannone, L.; et al. Predictors of late arrhythmic events after generator replacement in Brugada syndrome treated with prophylactic ICD. Front. Cardiovasc. Med. 2022, 9, 964694, Erratum in Front. Cardiovasc. Med. 2022, 9, 1076294. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcvm.2022.1076294. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  27. Gaita, F.; Cerrato, N.; Giustetto, C.; Martino, A.; Bergamasco, L.; Millesimo, M.; Barbonaglia, L.; Carvalho, P.; Caponi, D.; Saglietto, A.; et al. Asymptomatic Patients with Brugada ECG Pattern: Long-Term Prognosis from a Large Prospective Study. Circulation 2023, 148, 1543–1555. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  28. Kamakura, T.; Takagi, M.; Komatsu, Y.; Shinohara, T.; Aizawa, Y.; Sekiguchi, Y.; Yokoyama, Y.; Aihara, N.; Hiraoka, M.; Aonuma, K. Validation of novel risk prediction models in patients with Brugada syndrome: A multicenter study in Japan. Heart Rhythm 2024, 22, 1710–1717. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Gonzalez Corcia, M.C.; Sieira, J.; Sarkozy, A.; de Asmundis, C.; Chierchia, G.-B.; Ojeda, J.H.; Pappaert, G.; Brugada, P. Brugada syndrome in the young: An assessment of risk factors predicting future events. Europace 2017, 19, 1864–1873. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Kawamura, I.; Nakajima, M.; Kitamura, T.; Kaszynski, R.H.; Hojo, R.; Ohbe, H.; Sasabuchi, Y.; Matsui, H.; Fushimi, K.; Fukamizu, S.; et al. Patient characteristics and in-hospital complications of subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator for Brugada syndrome in Japan. J Arrhythm. 2019, 35, 842–847. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  31. Shinohara, T.; Takagi, M.; Kamakura, T.; Sekiguchi, Y.; Yokoyama, Y.; Aihara, N.; Hiraoka, M.; Aonuma, K.; Japan Idiopathic Ventricular Fibrillation Study (J-IVFS) Investigators. Long-term prognosis in patients with non-type 1 Brugada electrocardiogram: Results from a large Japanese cohort of idiopathic ventricular fibrillation. Ann Noninvasive Electrocardiol. 2021, 26, e12831. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  32. Katz, A.; Balasubramanian, S.; Freedman, Z. Procainamide-Provoked Brugada Pattern in a Patient Presenting with New-Onset Atrial Fibrillation or Flutter: When Does it Matter? J. Emerg. Med. 2023, 65, e229–e233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  33. Bergonti, M.; Sacher, F.; Arbelo, E.; Crotti, L.; Sabbag, A.; Casella, M.; Saenen, J.; Rossi, A.; Monaco, C.; Pannone, L.; et al. Implantable loop recorders in patients with Brugada syndrome: The BruLoop study. Eur. Heart J. 2024, 45, 1255–1265. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Kewcharoen, J.; Rattanawong, P.; Kanitsoraphan, C.; Mekritthikrai, R.; Prasitlumkum, N.; Putthapiban, P.; Mekraksakit, P.; Pattison, R.J.; Vutthikraivit, W. Atrial fibrillation and risk of major arrhythmic events in Brugada syndrome: A meta-analysis. Ann. Noninvasive Electrocardiol. 2019, 24, e12676. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  35. Ghaleb, R.; Anselmino, M.; Gaido, L.; Quaranta, S.; Giustetto, C.; Salama, M.K.; Salh, A.; Scaglione, M.; Fathy, E.; Gaita, F. Prevalence and Clinical Significance of Latent Brugada Syndrome in Atrial Fibrillation Patients Below 45 Years of Age. Front. Cardiovasc. Med. 2020, 7, 602536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  36. Morita, H.; Kusano-Fukushima, K.; Nagase, S.; Fujimoto, Y.; Hisamatsu, K.; Fujio, H.; Haraoka, K.; Kobayashi, M.; Morita, S.T.; Nakamura, K.; et al. Atrial fibrillation and atrial vulnerability in patients with Brugada syndrome. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2002, 40, 1437–1444. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  37. Itoh, H.; Shimizu, M.; Ino, H.; Okeie, K.; Yamaguchi, M.; Fujino, N.; Mabuchi, H.; Hokuriku Brugada Study Group. Arrhythmias in patients with Brugada-type electrocardiographic findings. Jpn. Circ. J. 2001, 65, 483–486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Kornej, J.; Börschel, C.S.; Benjamin, E.J.; Schnabel, R.B. Epidemiology of Atrial Fibrillation in the 21st Century: Novel Methods and New Insights. Circ. Res. 2020, 127, 4–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  39. Liu, L.; Wu, Z.; Kong, W.; Qiu, B.; Wang, Z.; Sun, J. Clinical features between paroxysmal and nonparoxysmal atrial fibrillation: A comparative analysis in eastern China. J. Cardiothorac. Surg. 2024, 19, 591, Erratum in J. Cardiothorac. Surg. 2024, 19, 622. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13019-024-03126-7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  40. Brugada, J.; Campuzano, O.; Arbelo, E.; Sarquella-Brugada, G.; Brugada, R. Present Status of Brugada Syndrome: JACC State-of-the-Art Review. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2018, 72, 1046–1059. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Zeppenfeld, K.; Tfelt-Hansen, J.; de Riva, M.; Winkel, B.G.; Behr, E.R.; A Blom, N.; Charron, P.; Corrado, D.; Dagres, N.; de Chillou, C.; et al. 2022 ESC Guidelines for the management of patients with ventricular arrhythmias and the prevention of sudden cardiac death: Developed by the task force for the management of patients with ventricular arrhythmias and the prevention of sudden cardiac death of the European Society of Cardiology (ESC) Endorsed by the Association for European Paediatric and Congenital Cardiology (AEPC). Eur. Heart J. 2022, 43, 3997–4126. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Sieira, J.; Ciconte, G.; Conte, G.; Chierchia, G.-B.; de Asmundis, C.; Baltogiannis, G.; Di Giovanni, G.; Saitoh, Y.; Irfan, G.; Casado-Arroyo, R.; et al. Asymptomatic Brugada Syndrome: Clinical Characterization and Long-Term Prognosis. Circ. Arrhythm. Electrophysiol. 2015, 8, 1144–1150. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Rattanawong, P.; Mattanapojanat, N.; Mead-Harvey, C.; Van Der Walt, C.; Kewcharoen, J.; Kanitsoraphan, C.; Vutthikraivit, W.; Prasitlumkum, N.; Putthapiban, P.; Chintanavilas, K.; et al. Predicting arrhythmic event score in Brugada syndrome: Worldwide pooled analysis with internal and external validation. Heart Rhythm 2023, 20, 1358–1367, Erratum in Heart Rhythm 2024, 21, P1763. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.hrthm.2024.07.107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Kawada, S.; Morita, H.; Antzelevitch, C.; Morimoto, Y.; Nakagawa, K.; Watanabe, A.; Nishii, N.; Nakamura, K.; Ito, H. Shanghai Score System for Diagnosis of Brugada Syndrome: Validation of the Score System and System and Reclassification of the Patients. JACC Clin. Electrophysiol. 2018, 4, 724–730. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  45. Gomes, D.A.; Lambiase, P.D.; Schilling, R.J.; Cappato, R.; Adragão, P.; Providência, R. Multiparametric models for predicting major arrhythmic events in Brugada syndrome: A systematic review and critical appraisal. Europace 2025, 27, euaf091. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Miyazaki, T.; Mitamura, H.; Miyoshi, S.; Soejima, K.; Aizawa, Y.; Ogawa, S. Autonomic and antiarrhythmic drug modulation of ST segment elevation in patients with Brugada syndrome. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 1996, 27, 1061–1070. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Bisignani, A.; Conte, G.; Pannone, L.; Sieira, J.; Del Monte, A.; Lipartiti, F.; Bala, G.; Miraglia, V.; Monaco, C.; Ströker, E.; et al. Long-Term Outcomes of Pulmonary Vein Isolation in Patients with Brugada Syndrome and Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation. J. Am. Heart Assoc. 2022, 11, e026290. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  48. Rodríguez-Mañero, M.; Kreidieh, B.; Valderrábano, M.; Baluja, A.; Martínez-Sande, J.L.; García-Seara, J.; Díaz-Fernández, B.; Pereira-Vázquez, M.; Lage, R.; González-Melchor, L.; et al. Ablation of atrial fibrillation in patients with Brugada syndrome: A systematic review of the literature. J. Arrhythm. 2018, 35, 18–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  49. Lee, W.S.; Kim, J.; Kwon, C.H.; Choi, J.H.; Jo, U.; Kim, Y.R.; Nam, G.-B.; Choi, K.-J.; Kim, Y.-H. Tachyarrhythmia Cycle Length in Appropriate versus Inappropriate Defibrillator Shocks in Brugada Syndrome, Early Repolarization Syndrome, or Idiopathic Ventricular Fibrillation. Korean Circ. J. 2016, 46, 179–185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  50. Kuck, K.H.; Brugada, J.; Fürnkranz, A.; Metzner, A.; Ouyang, F.; Chun, K.J.; Elvan, A.; Arentz, T.; Bestehorn, K.; Pocock, S.J.; et al. Cryoballoon or Radiofrequency Ablation for Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation. N. Engl. J. Med. 2016, 374, 2235–2245. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  51. Wilde, A.A.M.; Amin, A.S. Clinical Spectrum of SCN5A Mutations: Long QT Syndrome, Brugada Syndrome, and Cardiomyopathy. JACC Clin. Electrophysiol. 2018, 4, 569–579. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Edokobi, N.; Isom, L.L. Voltage-Gated Sodium Channel β1/β1B Subunits Regulate Cardiac Physiology and Pathophysiology. Front. Physiol. 2018, 9, 351. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  53. Kapplinger, J.D.; Tester, D.J.; Alders, M.; Benito, B.; Berthet, M.; Brugada, J.; Brugada, P.; Fressart, V.; Guerchicoff, A.; Harris-Kerr, C.; et al. An international compendium of mutations in the SCN5A-encoded cardiac sodium channel in patients referred for Brugada syndrome genetic testing. Heart Rhythm 2010, 7, 33–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
  54. Savio-Galimberti, E.; Darbar, D. Atrial Fibrillation and SCN5A Variants. Card. Electrophysiol. Clin. 2014, 6, 741–748. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Amin, A.S.; Boink, G.J.; Atrafi, F.; Spanjaart, A.M.; Asghari-Roodsari, A.; Molenaar, R.J.; Ruijter, J.M.; Wilde, A.A.M.; Tan, H.L. Facilitatory and inhibitory effects of SCN5A mutations on atrial fibrillation in Brugada syndrome. Europace 2011, 13, 968–975. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  56. Hung, Y.; Chao, T.F.; Liu, C.J.; Tuan, T.; Lin, Y.; Chang, S.; Lo, L.; Hu, Y.; Liao, J.; Chung, F.; et al. Is an Oral Anticoagulant Necessary for Young Atrial Fibrillation Patients with a CHA2DS2-VASc Score of 1 (Men) or 2 (Women)? J. Am. Heart Assoc. 2016, 5, e003839. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [PubMed Central]
Jcdd 12 00391 g001
Figure 1. PRISMA flow diagram for reporting the study selection process.
Figure 1. PRISMA flow diagram for reporting the study selection process.
Jcdd 12 00391 g001
Jcdd 12 00391 g002
Figure 2. (A) Major arrhythmic events in patients with BrS with and without AF—main analysis. (B) Funnel plot of major arrhythmic events in patients with BrS with and without AF [16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28].
Figure 2. (A) Major arrhythmic events in patients with BrS with and without AF—main analysis. (B) Funnel plot of major arrhythmic events in patients with BrS with and without AF [16,17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24,25,26,27,28].
Jcdd 12 00391 g002
Jcdd 12 00391 g003
Figure 3. Syncope in patients with BrS with and without AF, [16,17,18,19,20,23,24].
Figure 3. Syncope in patients with BrS with and without AF, [16,17,18,19,20,23,24].
Jcdd 12 00391 g003
Jcdd 12 00391 g004
Figure 4. (A) Death during follow-up in patients with BrS with and without AF. (B) SCN mutations in patients with BrS with and without AF, [17,18,19].
Figure 4. (A) Death during follow-up in patients with BrS with and without AF. (B) SCN mutations in patients with BrS with and without AF, [17,18,19].
Jcdd 12 00391 g004
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Aboutorabi, M.; Ahmad, M.; Bray, J.J.H.; Gomes, D.A.; Providencia, R. Impact of Atrial Fibrillation on the Outcome of Patients with Brugada Syndrome: A Meta-Analysis. J. Cardiovasc. Dev. Dis. 2025, 12, 391. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcdd12100391

AMA Style

Aboutorabi M, Ahmad M, Bray JJH, Gomes DA, Providencia R. Impact of Atrial Fibrillation on the Outcome of Patients with Brugada Syndrome: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Cardiovascular Development and Disease. 2025; 12(10):391. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcdd12100391

Chicago/Turabian Style

Aboutorabi, Max, Mahmood Ahmad, Jonathan J. H. Bray, Daniel A. Gomes, and Rui Providencia. 2025. "Impact of Atrial Fibrillation on the Outcome of Patients with Brugada Syndrome: A Meta-Analysis" Journal of Cardiovascular Development and Disease 12, no. 10: 391. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcdd12100391

APA Style

Aboutorabi, M., Ahmad, M., Bray, J. J. H., Gomes, D. A., & Providencia, R. (2025). Impact of Atrial Fibrillation on the Outcome of Patients with Brugada Syndrome: A Meta-Analysis. Journal of Cardiovascular Development and Disease, 12(10), 391. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcdd12100391

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop