Key result
Brugada syndrome shows no overall impact on quality of life despite worse physical functioning in higher-risk patients.
Why the study?
Brugada syndrome (BrS) carries an elevated risk of sudden cardiac death, prompting investigation into health-related quality of life in these patients and its relationship with clinical features and arrhythmic risk indicators.
Does a diagnosis of Brugada syndrome and higher arrhythmic risk (Sieira score) affect health-related quality of life (SF-36v2) compared to patients with a negative sodium channel blocker test and healthy controls?
Cross-Sectional (n=70)
No
Does a diagnosis of Brugada syndrome and higher arrhythmic risk (Sieira score) affect health-related quality of life (SF-36v2) compared to patients with a negative sodium channel blocker test and healthy controls?
While a Brugada syndrome diagnosis does not impair overall health-related quality of life in predominantly low-risk patients, higher clinical arrhythmic risk (Sieira score) and prior syncope are significantly associated with worse perceived general health and greater physical functioning limitations.
Low-risk Brugada syndrome warrants reassurance on quality of life; leaves open whether Sieira score identifies patients needing physical functioning support.
Background. Brugada syndrome (BrS) is associated with an elevated risk of sudden cardiac death (SCD). This study investigated health-related quality of life (HRQoL) among patients with BrS and examined whether clinical features and indicators of arrhythmic risk are related to patient-reported well-being.Methods. The study included 70 patients who were divided into three groups: spontaneous or sodium channel blocker test (SCBT) induced type 1 BrS electrocardiogram pattern (T1BrP), patients with negative SCBT, and control group. All patients completed the Short Form Health Survey version 2 (SF-36v2) questionnaire and underwent detailed SCD risk stratification.Results. The HRQoL of patients with T1BrP (median Modified Shanghai score was 4 [3.5–4.5], median Sieira score = 1 [0–2] points) did not differ compared with those with negative SCBT. In patients with T1BrP the Sieira score correlated with a poorer self-assessment of health (p = 0.014, R = 0.50), increased limitations in lifting or carrying groceries (p = 0.004, R = -0.57) and a stronger disagreement with the statement that they are as healthy as anybody they know (p = 0.019, R = 0.48). Moreover, Sieira score correlated negatively with Physical Functioning scale score (p = 0.025, R = -0.47). Among patients with T1BrP, those who experienced syncope, showed lower scores on the General Health scale compared to the remainder (51 [27–57] vs. 67 [57–82] points, p = 0.032). Conclusions. The diagnosis of BrS, especially among patients at low risk of SCD, does not significantly affect HRQoL. However, patients with T1BrP and higher clinical risk tend to feel less healthy and more limited in their daily lives.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Bijak et al. (2026) conducted a cross-sectional in Brugada syndrome (n=70). Type 1 Brugada ECG pattern (T1BrP) and arrhythmic risk (Sieira score) vs. Negative sodium channel blocker test (Non-T1BrP) and healthy controls was evaluated on SF-36v2 Physical Component Summary (PCS) T-score (p=0.62). Brugada syndrome did not reduce overall SF-36v2 quality of life (PCS 53.9 vs 55.7, p=0.62), though higher Sieira risk scores correlated with worse physical functioning (R=-0.47, p=0.025).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: