are test, which describes the percentage of the variability in effect estimates resulting from heterogeneity. *I* ^2^ \> 50% was considered to reflect significant statistical heterogeneity. A fixed effects model was used if *I* ^2^ \< 50%. The random‐effect model using the inverse variance heterogeneity method was used when *I* ^2^ \> 50%. To locate the origin of the heterogeneity, sensitivity analysis by excluding one study at a time, and subgroup analyses based on different disease conditions and different endpoints were performed. Funnel plots, Begg and Mazumdar rank correlation test and Egger\'s test were used to detect publication bias.

3. RESULTS {#joa312118-sec-0009}
==========

Figure [1](#joa312118-fig-0001){ref-type="fig"} shows a flow diagram detailing the above search terms with inclusion and exclusion criteria. A total of 29 and 57 entries were retrieved from PubMed and Embase, respectively. Nine studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in our final meta‐analysis.[6](#joa312118-bib-0006){ref-type="ref"}, [7](#joa312118-bib-0007){ref-type="ref"}, [11](#joa312118-bib-0011){ref-type="ref"}, [12](#joa312118-bib-0012){ref-type="ref"}, [13](#joa312118-bib-0013){ref-type="ref"}, [14](#joa312118-bib-0014){ref-type="ref"}, [15](#joa312118-bib-0015){ref-type="ref"}, [16](#joa312118-bib-0016){ref-type="ref"}, [17](#joa312118-bib-0017){ref-type="ref"} In this meta‐analysis, a total of 1740 subjects with Brugada Syndrome were included (mean age 45 years old, 80% male). The mean follow‐up duration was 68 ± 27 months. Of the entire cohort, 40% had a spontaneous Type 1 pattern and 19% were positive for SCN5a mutation. The baseline characteristics of these studies and of the study populations are shown in Table [1](#joa312118-tbl-0001){ref-type="table"}.

![Flow diagram of the study selection process](JOA3-34-587-g001){#joa312118-fig-0001}

###### 

Characteristics of the nine studies included in this meta‐analysis

  First author/year   Sample size (n)   T~peak~‐T~end~ measureme