| Literature DB >> 32084220 |
Alan Sugrue1, Vaibhav R Vaidya1, Christopher Livia2, Deepak Padmanabhan1, Anas Abudan1, Ameesh Isath1, Tyra Witt2, Christopher V DeSimone1, Paul Stalboerger2, Suraj Kapa1, Samuel J Asirvatham1,3, Christopher J McLeod1.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The application of brief high voltage electrical pulses to tissue can lead to an irreversible or reversible electroporation effect in a cell-specific manner. In the management of ventricular arrhythmias, the ability to target different tissue types, specifically cardiac conduction tissue (His-Purkinje System) vs. cardiac myocardium would be advantageous. We hypothesize that pulsed electric fields (PEFs) can be applied safely to the beating heart through a catheter-based approach, and we tested whether the superficial Purkinje cells can be targeted with PEFs without injury to underlying myocardial tissue.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32084220 PMCID: PMC7034868 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0229214
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Effect of PEF on Purkinje potential.
| Pulse Duration (us) | Voltage (Volts) | Number (n = 52) | Purkinje Potential Present | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 min, n (%) | 5 min, n (%) | 30 days, n (%) | |||
| 20 | 750 | 3 | 1 (67) | 1 (67) | - |
| 1050 | 1 | 1 (100) | 1 (100) | - | |
| 1125 | 2 | 1 (50) | 1 (50) | - | |
| 1500 | 4 | 2 (50) | 4 (100) | - | |
| 1800 | 2 | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | - | |
| 2250 | 6 | 1 (16) | 1(16) | - | |
| 3000 | 2 | 0 (0) | 0 (0) | - | |
| 90 | 500 | 1 | 0 (0) | 1 (100) | 1 (100) |
| 750 | 15 | 5 (33) | 6 (40) | 9 (100) | |
| 1050 | 4 | 1 (25) | 2 (25) | ||
| 1125 | 8 | 0 (0) | 1 (13) | 8 (100) | |
| 1500 | 4 | 2 (50) | 2(25) | 4 (100) | |
*n = 13 after removing 6 that were acute studies
^signals remaining represents a His bundle signal that could not be targeted
~ signals remaining represents a large anterior fascicle that could not be targeted
Change in QRS duration after PEF.
| Pre PEF | 5 mins post PEF | 30 days of PEF | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Acute Animals | ||||
| 1 | 81 | 85 | - | |
| 2 | 74 | 78 | - | |
| 3 | 69 | 65 | - | |
| 4 | 59 | 65 | - | |
| 5 | 63 | 69 | - | |
| Chronic Animals | ||||
| 1 | 84 | 86 | 80 | |
| 2 | 80 | 80 | 82 | |
| 3 | 82 | 84 | 82 | |
| 4 | 67 | 74 | 80 | |
| 5 | 76 | 89 | 84 | |
| 6 | 67 | 69 | 65 | |
| Mean (±SD), ms | 72.9± 8.4 | 76.7 ±8.8 | 7.8 ± 6.9 | |
| ms- milliseconds |
Histopathological analysis from acute animals.
| Animal | Myocardial damage | Subendocardial Ablation (average percentage) | Purkinje damage | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Contraction Necrosis | Endocardial hemorrhage | |||
| 1 | None | None | No (0%) | No |
| 2 | Minimal | Mild | Yes (1.0%) | Yes |
| 3 | None | Minimal | Yes (5.0%) | Yes |
| 4 | None | Minimal | Yes (1.0%) | Yes |
| 5 | Minimal | Minimal | Yes (1.0%) | Yes |
* A percentage of length of the entire endocardium in the section
Histopathological analysis from the chronic animals.
| Animal | Myocardial damage | Subendocardial Ablation (average percentage) | Purkinje damage | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Endocardial fibrosis | Myocardial fibrosis | |||
| 1 | Minimal | Minimal | Yes (11.7%) | No |
| 2 | None | None | No | No |
| 3 | Minimal | Minimal | Yes (15.0%) | No |
| 4 | Minimal | Minimal | Yes (24.0%) | No |
| 5 | Minimal | Minimal | Yes (17.5%) | No |
| 6 | Minimal | Minimal | Yes (11.7%) | No |
* A percentage of length of the entire endocardium in the section