| Literature DB >> 28153730 |
L G J Tertoolen1, S R Braam2, B J van Meer3, R Passier4, C L Mummery5.
Abstract
Multi electrode arrays (MEAs) are increasingly used to detect external field potentials in electrically active cells. Recently, in combination with cardiomyocytes derived from human (induced) pluripotent stem cells they have started to become a preferred tool to examine newly developed drugs for potential cardiac toxicity in pre-clinical safety pharmacology. The most important risk parameter is proarrhythmic activity in cardiomyocytes which can cause sudden cardiac death. Whilst MEAs can provide medium- to high- throughput noninvasive assay platform, the translation of a field potential to cardiac action potential (normally measured by low-throughput patch clamp) is complex so that accurate assessment of drug risk to the heart is in practice still challenging. To address this, we used computational simulation to study the theoretical relationship between aspects of the field potential and the underlying cardiac action potential. We then validated the model in both primary mouse- and human pluripotent (embryonic) stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes showing that field potentials measured in MEAs could be converted to action potentials that were essentially identical to those determined directly by electrophysiological patch clamp. The method significantly increased the amount of information that could be extracted from MEA measurements and thus combined the advantages of medium/high throughput with more informative readouts. We believe that this will benefit the analysis of drug toxicity screening of cardiomyocytes using in time and accuracy.Entities:
Keywords: Action potential; Cardiomyocytes; Cardiotoxicity; Computational simulation; Field potential; Multi electrode array
Mesh:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28153730 PMCID: PMC5854265 DOI: 10.1016/j.bbrc.2017.01.151
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biochem Biophys Res Commun ISSN: 0006-291X Impact factor: 3.575
Fig. 1(A) A ventricular hPSC-CM AP and FP. Composing active currents are schematically depicted during time. (B) Equivalent circuit of a cell on a MEA. Ram) apical cell membrane resistance to the bath; Cam) apical membrane capacitance to the bath; Cjm) cell membrane capacitance to junction; Rjm) membrane resistance to the junction; Rb) bath resistance; Cbe) electrode capacitance via the bath resistor; Csh) shunt capacitance of the electrode; Rj) junction resistance; Cje) junction capacitance of the electrode; Ip) injection point of the AP (Vm) in the simulation circuit. (C) Measured AP of a spontaneous beating mouse E17.5 cardiomyocyte. (D) Power spectrum of panel C, peak frequency at 1 Hz. (E) Result after Chybechev IIR filtering (Fc = 30 Hz) of the AP in panel C. (F) Power spectrum of panel E, peak frequency at ∼3.5 Hz. (G) Measured FP of a mouse E17.5 cardiomyocyte on a MEA. (H) Power spectrum of panel G, peak frequency at ∼3 Hz.
Relationship between filter frequency in the time domain and the peak frequency in the frequency domain.
| Filter frequency (Hz) | Peak power frequency of the filtered AP (Hz) |
|---|---|
| no filter | 0.57 |
| 15 | 2.2 |
| 30 | 3.1 |
| 45 | 3.8 |
| 60 | 6.9 |
Fig. 2Simulated AP representative of a mouse E17.5 cardiomyocyte (A) and corresponding SPICE derived FPs with different values for Rj and Cje with a product constant 5000 pF·MOhm (Fc = 30 Hz) (B,C,D and E). Panels (D and E) result into the characteristic FP shape compared to a measured FP of a mouse cardiomyocyte E17.5 (F, repeated from Fig. 1G).
The corresponding FPs are shown in Fig. 2B–E. Combinations with highest junctional resistances (Rj > 50 MOhm) are in good agreement with the measured FPs from embryonic mouse cardiomyocytes E17.5 on a MEA (Fig. 4F).
| Fc (Hz) | Rj (MOhm) | Cje (pF) |
|---|---|---|
| 30 | 5 | 1000 |
| 30 | 10 | 500 |
| 30 | 50 | 100 |
| 30 | 100 | 50 |
Fig. 4Simulated APs of hPSC-CMs with different durations (180–290 ms) (A) and corresponding SPICE derived FPs (B). The relationship of the APD versus the FPD is shown in panel G. Simulated APD variation due to K+ current modulation (C) and corresponding SPICE derived FPs (D). The ADP90-ADP70 values plotted versus the FDP4-FDP3 are shown in panel H. Simulated APD variation without K+ current modulation (E) and corresponding SPICE derived FPs (F). The ADP90-ADP70 values plotted versus the FDP4-FDP3 are shown in panel I. (J) FPs measured from hPSC-CMs exposed to E-4031. E-4031 evoked changes in K+ current and FPD prolongation (L) and modulation of the FDP4-FDP3 (N). Bay K 8644 (K) induced prolongation (M) without modulation of the FDP4-FDP3 (O).
Fig. 3(A) Simulated APs of hPSC-CMs with different upstroke durations (0.2–4 ms) and (B) the corresponding SPICE derived FPs (Cje = 50 pF; Rj = 100 MOhm). Slope upstroke of the different APs against the slope upstroke (C) and slope decay (D) of the corresponding SPICE derived FPs. (E) FPs measured from hPSC-CMs, treated with different concentrations of tetrodotoxine (TTX). Slopes quantified from the upstroke (initiation to 0′) (F) and from the decay (0′ to 1′) (G).
Linearity between Vmax and slope upstroke and slope decay of the FP for different combinations of Cje and Rj .
| Cje = 50 pF Rj = 100 MOhm | R2 |
|---|---|
| slope upstroke versus Vmax | 0.9965 |
| slope decay versus Vmax | 0.8725 |
| Cje = 100 pF Rj = 50 MOhm | R2 |
| slope upstroke versus Vmax | 0.9946 |
| slope decay versus Vmax | 0.7031 |
| Cje = 500 pF Rj = 10 MOhm | R2 |
| slope upstroke versus Vmax | 0.9980 |
| slope decay versus Vmax | 0.8116 |