Abstract
Brugada syndrome (BrS) is one of the most common inherited channelopathies associated with an increased risk of sudden cardiac death. Appropriate use of an ICD in high-risk patients is life-saving. However, there remains a lack of consensus on risk stratification, and even on the diagnosis of BrS itself. Some argue that people with a type 1 Brugada ECG pattern but no symptoms should not be diagnosed with BrS, and guidelines recommend observation without therapy in these patients. Others argue that the presence of a spontaneous (rather than drug-induced) type 1 ECG pattern alone is enough to label them as high-risk for arrhythmic events, particularly if syncope is also present. Syncope and a spontaneous type 1 ECG pattern are the only factors that have consistently been shown to predict ventricular arrhythmic events and sudden cardiac death. Other markers have yielded conflicting data. However, in combination they may have roles in risk scoring models. Epicardial catheter ablation in the right ventricular outflow tract has shown promise in studies as an alternative management option to an ICD, but longer follow-up is required to ensure that the ablation effect is permanent.