https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6054-100X
-
Views
-
Cite
Cite
Gregory Dendramis, Implantable loop recorders in patients with Brugada syndrome: the importance of a correct patient stratification, European Heart Journal, Volume 45, Issue 31, 14 August 2024, Page 2894, https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehae393
Close - Share Icon Share
Extract
This commentary refers to ‘Implantable loop recorders in patients with Brugada syndrome: the BruLoop study’, by M. Bergonti et al., https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehae133 and the discussion piece ‘Implantable loop recorders in Brugada syndrome: symptoms and arrhythmia characterization’, by G. Conte and M. Bergonti, https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehae428.
We have read with interest the article recently published by Bergonti et al.1 entitled ‘implantable loop recorders in patients with Brugada syndrome: the BruLoop study’. A total of 370 patients with Brugada syndrome (BrS) with an implantable loop recorder (ILR) were followed with continuous rhythm monitoring for a median follow-up of 3 years. For the authors, ILR detects arrhythmic events in nearly 30% of symptomatic BrS patients, leading to appropriate therapy in 70% of them. The most commonly detected arrhythmias are atrial arrhythmias and bradyarrhythmias, while ventricular arrhythmias are detected only in 7% of cases.
In light of the conclusions of the authors, it would be interesting to know which cluster of BrS patients they monitored: low or high-risk patients, with spontaneous or induced patterns, implanted in primary or secondary prevention?, and if everyone was indiscriminately placed in a single assessment group or if there are differences in the various risk subgroups.
