Key result
Propofol shows no increased arrhythmic risk in Brugada syndrome, with lidocaine preferred for regional anesthesia.
Why the study?
Several perioperative and anesthetic drugs are contraindicated in Brugada syndrome, but evidence regarding common anesthetic pharmaceuticals remains scarce.
Does specific pharmacological management during anesthesia prevent proarrhythmic effects in patients with Brugada syndrome?
Systematic Review (n=199)
Does specific pharmacological management during anesthesia prevent proarrhythmic effects in patients with Brugada syndrome?
Despite poor overall evidence quality, propofol and lidocaine appear safe for general and local anesthesia, respectively, in patients with Brugada syndrome.
Supports propofol use in BrS anesthesia; extends sparse case-based evidence for perioperative drug selection.
Brugada syndrome (BrS) is a major risk factor for sudden cardiac death and ventricular tachyarrhythmias. Several drugs are contraindicated in patients with BrS, including some commonly administered drugs during anesthesia or in the perioperative period; however, there is still a paucity of evidence regarding BrS and common anesthetic pharmaceuticals. We conducted a systematic literature search (PubMed, updated October 10, 2022), including all studies reporting pharmacological management of BrS patients during anesthesia or intensive care, with a specific focus on proarrhythmic effects and possible pharmacological interactions in the context of BrS. The search revealed 44 relevant items, though only three original studies. Two randomized controlled studies were identified, one comparing propofol and etomidate for the induction of general anesthesia and one investigating lidocaine with or without epinephrine for local anesthesia; there was also one prospective study without a control group. The other studies were case series (n = 5, for a total of 19 patients) or case reports (n = 36). Data are reported on a total population of 199 patients who underwent general or local anesthesia. None of the studies evaluated BrS patients in the intensive care unit (ICU). We found the studies focusing on the pharmacological management of BrS patients undergoing general or local anesthesia to be of generally poor quality. However, it appears that propofol can be used safely, without an increase in arrhythmic events. Regional anesthesia is possible, and lidocaine might be preferred over longer-acting local anesthetics. Considering the quality of the included studies and their anecdotal evidence, it seems increasingly important to conduct large multicenter studies or promote international registries with high-quality data on the anesthesiological management of these patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Cuttone et al. (2023) conducted a systematic review in Brugada syndrome (n=199). Pharmacological management during anesthesia (e.g., propofol, lidocaine) was evaluated on Proarrhythmic effects and possible pharmacological interactions. In a systematic review of 199 patients with Brugada syndrome, propofol appeared safe without increasing arrhythmic events, and lidocaine was preferred for regional anesthesia.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: