Prediction of ventricular arrhythmias in patients with a spontaneous Brugada type 1 pattern: the key is in the electrocardiogram
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AIMS: There is currently no reliable tool to quantify the risks of ventricular fibrillation or sudden cardiac arrest (VF/SCA) in patients with spontaneous Brugada type 1 pattern (BrT1). Previous studies showed that electrocardiographic (ECG) markers of depolarization or repolarization disorders might indicate elevated risk. We aimed to design a VF/SCA risk prediction model based on ECG analyses for adult patients with spontaneous BrT1. METHODS AND RESULTS: This retrospective multicentre international study analysed ECG data from 115 patients (mean age 45.1 ± 12.8 years, 105 males) with spontaneous BrT1. Of these, 45 patients had experienced VF/SCA and 70 patients did not experience VF/SCA. Among 10 ECG markers, a univariate analysis showed significant associations between VF/SCA and maximum corrected Tpeak-Tend intervals ≥100 ms in precordial leads (LMaxTpec) (P < 0.001), BrT1 in a peripheral lead (pT1) (P = 0.004), early repolarization in inferolateral leads (ER) (P < 0.001), and QRS duration ≥120 ms in lead V2 (P = 0.002). The Cox multivariate analysis revealed four predictors of VF/SCA: the LMaxTpec [hazard ratio (HR) 8.3, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.4-28.5; P < 0.001], LMaxTpec + ER (HR 14.9, 95% CI 4.2-53.1; P < 0.001), LMaxTpec + pT1 (HR 17.2, 95% CI 4.1-72; P < 0.001), and LMaxTpec + pT1 + ER (HR 23.5, 95% CI 6-93; P < 0.001). Our multidimensional penalized spline model predicted the 1-year risk of VF/SCA, based on age and these markers. CONCLUSION: LMaxTpec and its association with pT1 and/or ER indicated elevated VF/SCA risk in adult patients with spontaneous BrT1. We successfully developed a simple risk prediction model based on age and these ECG markers.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".