Key result
The Brugada algorithm demonstrated excellent pooled sensitivity of 0.92 (95% CI 0.88-0.95) and moderate pooled specificity of 0.71 (95% CI 0.57-0.82) for discriminating SVT from VT.
Why the study?
Does the Brugada algorithm accurately discriminate between SVT and VT in broad QRS complex tachycardia?
Meta-Analysis (n=1,918)
Does the Brugada algorithm accurately discriminate between SVT and VT in broad QRS complex tachycardia?
Effect estimate: DOR 29 (95% CI 12-72)
The Brugada algorithm demonstrates excellent sensitivity and moderate specificity for differentiating SVT from VT in broad complex tachycardia.
Supports Brugada algorithm to rule out VT in wide-complex tachycardia; confirms pooled diagnostic performance across studies.
Background: The diagnosis precision of Brugada algorithm in discriminating between supraventricular tachycardia and ventricular tachycardia remains controversial. We aim to evaluate the diagnostic value of Brugada algorithm in broad complex tachycardia arrhythmia.Methods: Eligible studies were identified through searching PubMed, Embase, Web of Science databases, Wan Fang data resource, China National Knowledge Infrastructure prior to 5st January 2018. Studies were assessed for quality using the Quality Assessment for Studies of Diagnostic Accuracy, 2nd version (QUADAS-2). Pooled sensitivity and pooled specificity with 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated using random-effects models. Summary receiver operator characteristic (SROC) curves and the area under curve (AUC) were performed.Results: A total of 13 studies including 1918 electrocardiogram (ECG) were enrolled in this meta-analysis. The pooled sensitivity and specificity were 0.92(95% CI: 0.88–0.95), and 0.71(95% CI: 0.57-0.82), respectively. The positive likelihood ratio was 3 (95% CI, 2.0–5.0) and the negative likelihood ratio was 0.11 (95% CI, 0.06–0.19). The summary Diagnostic Odds Ratio (DOR) was 29 (95% CI: 12–72). The AUC was 0.95. Meta-regression analysis showed that sample size, study type and region were not the major sources of heterogeneity, the publication date may account for heterogeneity.Conclusion: Brugada algorithm has excellent pooled sensitivity and moderate pooled specificity for discriminating SVT from VT. It deserves to be widely used as clinical diagnostic methods.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Chai et al. (2018) conducted a meta-analysis in Broad QRS complex tachycardia (n=1,918). Brugada algorithm was evaluated on Pooled sensitivity and specificity for discriminating SVT from VT (DOR 29, 95% CI 12-72). The Brugada algorithm demonstrated excellent pooled sensitivity of 0.92 (95% CI 0.88-0.95) and moderate pooled specificity of 0.71 (95% CI 0.57-0.82) for discriminating SVT from VT.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: