Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 393

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Ionic and Cellular Basis for the Predominance of the Brugada Syndrome Phenotype in Males

Open access
Di Diego, José M., Cordeiro, Jonathan M., Goodrow, Robert J., Fish, Jeffrey M., Zygmunt, Andrew C., Pérez, Guillermo J., Scornik, Fabiana S., Antzelevitch, Charles·2002·Circulation

Abstract

Background— The Brugada syndrome displays an autosomal dominant mode of transmission with low penetrance. Despite equal genetic transmission of the disease, the clinical phenotype is 8 to 10 times more prevalent in males than in females. The basis for this intriguing sex-related distinction is unknown. The present study tests the hypothesis that the disparity in expression of the Brugada phenotype is a result of a more prominent I to -mediated action potential notch in the right ventricular (RV) epicardium of males versus females. Methods and Results— We studied epicardial tissue slices, arterially perfused wedge preparations, and dissociated epicardial myocytes isolated from male and female canine hearts. RV epicardium action potential phase 1 amplitude was 64.8±2.0% of that of phase 2 in males compared with 73.8±4.4% in females ( P <0.05) at a cycle length of 2000 ms. I to density was 26% smaller and time constant for inactivation 17% smaller at +40 mV in female versus male RV epicardial cells ( P <0.05). The other functional characteristics of I to , including the voltage dependence of inactivation and time course of reactivation, were no different between the sexes. Pinacidil caused loss of action potential dome in male, but not female, RV epicardial tissue slices. Terfenadine (5 μmol/L) induced phase 2 reentry in 6 of 7 male but only 2 of 7 female arterially perfused wedge preparations. Two of 6 male and 1 of 2 female preparations developed polymorphic ventricular tachycardia/ventricular fibrillation. Conclusions— Our results suggest that the predominance of the Brugada phenotype in males is a result of the presence of a more prominent I to in males versus females.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1161/01.cir.0000032002.22105.7a

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 393

Metadata

Authors
Di Diego, J. M., Cordeiro, J. M., Goodrow, R. J., Fish, J. M., Zygmunt, A. C., Pérez, G. J., Scornik, F. S., & Antzelevitch, C.
Venue
Circulation
Published
2002-10-08
Volume
106
Issue
15
Pages
2004-2011
ISSN
  • 0009-7322 (ISSN-L)
  • 1524-4539
OpenAlex
W2140332009
Cited by
393
References
0
FWCI
13.08
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Ionic and Cellular Basis for the Predominance of the Brugada Syndrome Phenotype in Males. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1161/01.cir.0000032002.22105.7a
The paper
Di Diego, J. M., Cordeiro, J. M., Goodrow, R. J., Fish, J. M., Zygmunt, A. C., Pérez, G. J., Scornik, F. S., & Antzelevitch, C. (2002). Ionic and Cellular Basis for the Predominance of the Brugada Syndrome Phenotype in Males. Circulation. https://doi.org/10.1161/01.cir.0000032002.22105.7a

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.