Why the study?
In young patients with Brugada syndrome, transvenous ICDs risk lead-related complications while S-ICD far-field sensing is vulnerable to T-wave oversensing and inappropriate shocks.
Does conversion from a subcutaneous ICD to an extravascular ICD prevent T-wave oversensing and inappropriate shocks in a lean adolescent with Brugada syndrome?
Does conversion from a subcutaneous ICD to an extravascular ICD prevent T-wave oversensing and inappropriate shocks in a lean adolescent with Brugada syndrome?
Conversion from a subcutaneous ICD to an extravascular ICD is a feasible, fully extracardiac option that resolves T-wave oversensing and recurrent inappropriate shocks in lean adolescents with Brugada syndrome.
Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Extravascular ICD merits prospective evaluation in Brugada adolescents; leaves open questions on sensing reliability and practice change.
Brugada syndrome (BrS) is an inherited cardiac ion-channel disorder characterized by a coved-type ST-segment elevation in the right precordial leads and a propensity for malignant ventricular arrhythmias1. In young patients who require lifelong arrhythmic protection, transvenous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) systems prevent sudden death but expose them to lead-related infection, fracture, and vascular obstruction1. The subcutaneous ICD (S-ICD) eliminates intravascular hardware, yet its far-field sensing architecture is vulnerable to T-wave oversensing and consequent inappropriate shocks, pitfalls that are accentuated in lean, physically active adolescents with BrS, whose repolarization morphology is highly dynamic.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Garibaldi et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: