Literature DB >> 16226236

Near-threshold field stimulation: intramural versus surface activation.

Christian W Zemlin1, Sergey Mironov, Arkady M Pertsov.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: The mechanism by which an electric field terminates arrhythmias continues to puzzle investigators. Existing experimental methods provide information about epicardial manifestations of electrical cardioversion, yet little is known about field effects deep inside the myocardium. Here we combine specially designed optical mapping experiments and computer modeling to separate the intra-myocardial and surface field effects.
METHODS: We used isolated coronary perfused and superfused slabs of pig right ventricular wall (n=6) stained with di-4-ANNEPS. A uniform transmural field was produced via two parallel planar (5 x 5 cm) transparent mesh electrodes aligned with the endocardial and epicardial surfaces. Low-intensity shocks (< or =3.3 V/cm) were applied during diastole. The electrical activity under both electrodes was recorded simultaneously using two CCD cameras at 800 frames/s. Shock responses were also simulated using a bidomain Luo-Rudy model.
RESULTS: We discovered that during the near-threshold diastolic field stimulation, when surface polarization should be dominant, the early activation occurs not at the cathodal surface, as might be expected, but deep inside the myocardium. Comparison of epi- and endocardial activation delays suggests that the sites of early activation are located closer to the endocardium. Our experimental observations could be reproduced computationally by assuming large resistive heterogeneities inside the myocardial wall.
CONCLUSIONS: Surface polarization plays a minor role during field stimulation. Intramural virtual electrodes produced even by weak fields are sufficiently strong to initiate intra-myocardial excitation. Significant heterogeneities in tissue resistivity may explain the strength of the virtual electrodes.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16226236     DOI: 10.1016/j.cardiores.2005.08.012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Cardiovasc Res        ISSN: 0008-6363            Impact factor:   10.787


  7 in total

1.  Probing field-induced tissue polarization using transillumination fluorescent imaging.

Authors:  Bryan J Caldwell; Marcel Wellner; Bogdan G Mitrea; Arkady M Pertsov; Christian W Zemlin
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2010-10-06       Impact factor: 4.033

2.  Diastolic field stimulation: the role of shock duration in epicardial activation and propagation.

Authors:  Marcella C Woods; Ilija Uzelac; Mark R Holcomb; John P Wikswo; Veniamin Y Sidorov
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2013-07-16       Impact factor: 4.033

Review 3.  Mechanisms of cardiac conduction: a history of revisions.

Authors:  Rengasayee Veeraraghavan; Robert G Gourdie; Steven Poelzing
Journal:  Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol       Date:  2014-01-10       Impact factor: 4.733

Review 4.  Old cogs, new tricks: a scaffolding role for connexin43 and a junctional role for sodium channels?

Authors:  Rengasayee Veeraraghavan; Steven Poelzing; Robert G Gourdie
Journal:  FEBS Lett       Date:  2014-01-28       Impact factor: 4.124

5.  Cardiac response to low-energy field pacing challenges the standard theory of defibrillation.

Authors:  Bryan J Caldwell; Mark L Trew; Arkady M Pertsov
Journal:  Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol       Date:  2015-03-15

Review 6.  The perinexus: sign-post on the path to a new model of cardiac conduction?

Authors:  J Matthew Rhett; Rengasayee Veeraraghavan; Steven Poelzing; Robert G Gourdie
Journal:  Trends Cardiovasc Med       Date:  2013-03-11       Impact factor: 6.677

7.  Low-energy defibrillation with nanosecond electric shocks.

Authors:  Frency Varghese; Johanna U Neuber; Fei Xie; Jonathan M Philpott; Andrei G Pakhomov; Christian W Zemlin
Journal:  Cardiovasc Res       Date:  2017-12-01       Impact factor: 10.787

  7 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.