❤️ Brugada Criteria (VT vs SVT with Aberrancy)
UseWhen to use: regular wide-complex tachycardia ECG analysis when the patient is stable enough for careful trac…
StrataPositive step → treat/plan as VT; all negative may support SVT+aberrancy only if clinically appropriate.
LimitsWhen not to use: unstable WCT — treat as VT immediately. · Pitfall: overcalling morphology without measuring intervals. · Pre-excited SVT and paced rhythms are special cases.
SourceAHA ACLS / local WCT protocols (tool-page edition)
This-shift next steps
After scoring: open the scene pack, peer scores, and the matching pathway. Local reference — no HIS write.
Paste the link in Slack, Teams, X, or LinkedIn — the preview image comes from this page’s Open Graph card.
Methodology · worked example, guidelines & full notes
Unstable → VT pathway first.
When to use
When to use: regular wide-complex tachycardia ECG analysis when the patient is stable enough for careful tracing review.
How it works
Any of: no RS in precordials; R-to-S > 100 ms; AV dissociation; VT morphology criteria in V1–V2/V6 → favours VT.
Key points
- Unstable → VT pathway first.
- AV dissociation is highly specific when seen.
- Next: ACLS/WCT pathway; expert ECG review.
References
- [Guideline / primary source]AHA ACLS / local WCT protocols (tool-page edition)
- Brugada P, et al. Circulation 1991
Worked calculation
The values below come from this tool's own example placeholders and are computed server-side with the formula shown on this page, so the arithmetic can be checked quickly. It demonstrates how to substitute values only — it is not clinical advice and not a real case.
| Step 1 — Absence of an RS complex in all precordial leads | No (RS present in ≥1 precordial lead) |
|---|---|
| Step 2 — R-to-S interval > 100 ms in any precordial lead | No |
| Step 3 — Atrioventricular dissociation | No / not seen |
| Step 4 — Morphology criteria for VT in V1–V2 and V6 | No (SVT-like morphology) |
→Brugada algorithmFavours SVT with aberrancy
- Positive steps：None — proceed as SVT+aberrancy only if unstable features absent
- Unstable WCT：If unstable, treat as VT regardless of algorithm.
| Step 1 — Absence of an RS complex in all precordial leads | Yes — favours VT |
|---|---|
| Step 2 — R-to-S interval > 100 ms in any precordial lead | Yes — favours VT |
| Step 3 — Atrioventricular dissociation | Yes — favours VT |
| Step 4 — Morphology criteria for VT in V1–V2 and V6 | Yes — VT morphology criteria met |
→Brugada algorithmFavours VT
- Positive steps：1 no RS; 2 RS>100 ms; 3 AV dissociation; 4 morphology
- Unstable WCT：If unstable, treat as VT regardless of algorithm.
Verification & sources · governance
FAQ
Frequently asked questions
- Does Brugada Criteria (VT vs SVT with Aberrancy) upload patient data? Where is it calculated?
- Calculation runs locally in the browser; inputs and results are not uploaded. For licensed clinicians only; interpret with history, investigations and local protocols — not a diagnosis or prescription.
- How is Brugada Criteria (VT vs SVT with Aberrancy) calculated in practice? Can you show a worked example?
- Inputs: Step 1 — Absence of an RS complex in all precordial leads No (RS present in ≥1 precordial lead), Step 2 — R-to-S interval > 100 ms in any precordial lead No, Step 3 — Atrioventricular dissociation No / not seen, Step 4 — Morphology criteria for VT in V1–V2 and V6 No (SVT-like morphology) → Result: Brugada algorithm Favours SVT with aberrancy（Positive steps: None — proceed as SVT+aberrancy only if unstable features absent, Unstable WCT: If unstable, treat as VT regardless of algorithm.） Inputs: Step 1 — Absence of an RS complex in all precordial leads Yes — favours VT, Step 2 — R-to-S interval > 100 ms in any precordial lead Yes — favours VT, Step 3 — Atrioventricular dissociation Yes — favours VT, Step 4 — Morphology criteria for VT in V1–V2 and V6 Yes — VT morphology criteria met → Result: Brugada algorithm Favours VT（Positive steps: 1 no RS; 2 RS>100 ms; 3 AV dissociation; 4 morphology, Unstable WCT: If unstable, treat as VT regardless of algorithm.）