Khurshid Shaan, Chen Wanyi, Bode Weeranun D, Wasfy Jason H, Chhatwal Jagpreet, Lubitz Steven A
Cardiology Division Massachusetts General Hospital Boston MA.
Cardiovascular Research Center Massachusetts General Hospital Boston MA.
J Am Heart Assoc. 2021 Aug 17;10(16):e021144. doi: 10.1161/JAHA.121.021144. Epub 2021 Aug 13.
Background Optimal management of asymptomatic Brugada syndrome (BrS) with spontaneous type I electrocardiographic pattern is uncertain. Methods and Results We developed an individual-level simulation comprising 2 000 000 average-risk individuals with asymptomatic BrS and spontaneous type I electrocardiographic pattern. We compared (1) observation, (2) electrophysiologic study (EPS)-guided implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD), and (3) upfront ICD, each using either subcutaneous or transvenous ICD, resulting in 6 strategies tested. The primary outcome was quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), with cardiac deaths (arrest or procedural-related) as a secondary outcome. We varied BrS diagnosis age and underlying arrest rate. We assessed cost-effectiveness at $100 000/QALY. Compared with observation, EPS-guided subcutaneous ICD resulted in 0.35 QALY gain/individual and 4130 cardiac deaths avoided/100 000 individuals, and EPS-guided transvenous ICD resulted in 0.26 QALY gain and 3390 cardiac deaths avoided. Compared with observation, upfront ICD reduced cardiac deaths by a greater margin (subcutaneous ICD, 8950; transvenous ICD, 6050), but only subcutaneous ICD improved QALYs (subcutaneous ICD, 0.25 QALY gain; transvenous ICD, 0.01 QALY loss), and complications were higher. ICD-based strategies were more effective at younger ages and higher arrest rates (eg, using subcutaneous devices, upfront ICD was the most effective strategy at ages 20-39.4 years and arrest rates >1.37%/year; EPS-guided ICD was the most effective strategy at ages 39.5-51.3 years and arrest rates 0.47%-1.37%/year, and observation was the most effective strategy at ages >51.3 years and arrest rates <0.47%/year). EPS-guided subcutaneous ICD was cost-effective ($80 508/QALY). Conclusions Device-based approaches (with or without EPS risk stratification) can be more effective than observation among selected patients with asymptomatic BrS. BrS management should be tailored to patient characteristics.
对于无症状且心电图呈现自发I型模式的Brugada综合征(BrS)患者,最佳管理方案尚不明确。
我们开展了一项个体水平的模拟研究,纳入200万具有平均风险的无症状BrS且心电图呈现自发I型模式的个体。我们比较了以下三种策略:(1)观察;(2)电生理检查(EPS)指导下的植入式心律转复除颤器(ICD);(3)直接植入ICD,每种策略又分为使用皮下ICD或经静脉ICD,共测试了6种策略。主要结局指标为质量调整生命年(QALYs),心脏死亡(心脏骤停或与手术相关)作为次要结局指标。我们改变了BrS的诊断年龄和潜在的心脏骤停发生率。我们以100000美元/QALY评估成本效益。与观察相比,EPS指导下的皮下ICD可使个体QALY增加0.35,每100000人中可避免4130例心脏死亡;EPS指导下的经静脉ICD可使QALY增加0.26,避免3390例心脏死亡。与观察相比,直接植入ICD在降低心脏死亡方面幅度更大(皮下ICD为8950例;经静脉ICD为6050例),但只有皮下ICD改善了QALYs(皮下ICD使QALY增加0.25;经静脉ICD使QALY减少0.01),且并发症更高。基于ICD的策略在较年轻患者和较高心脏骤停发生率时更有效(例如,使用皮下装置时,直接植入ICD在20 - 39.4岁且心脏骤停发生率>1.37%/年时是最有效的策略;EPS指导下的ICD在39.5 - 51.3岁且心脏骤停发生率为0.47% - 1.37%/年时是最有效的策略,而观察在年龄>51.3岁且心脏骤停发生率<0.47%/年时是最有效的策略)。EPS指导下的皮下ICD具有成本效益(80508美元/QALY)。
对于部分无症状BrS患者,基于器械的方法(无论有无EPS风险分层)可能比观察更有效。BrS的管理应根据患者特征进行个体化定制。