Literature DB >> 8785290

Mechanisms of cardiac cell excitation with premature monophasic and biphasic field stimuli: a model study.

M G Fishler1, E A Sobie, N V Thakor, L Tung.   

Abstract

The mechanisms by which extracellular electric field stimuli induce the (re)excitation of cardiac cells in various stages of refractoriness are still not well understood. We modeled the interactions between an isolated cardiac cell and imposed extracellular electric fields to determine the mechanisms by which relatively low-strength uniform monophasic and biphasic field stimuli induce premature reexcitations. An idealized ventricular cell was simulated with 11 subcellular membrane patches, each of which obeyed Luo-Rudy (phase 1) kinetics. Implementing a standard S1-S2 pulse protocol, strength-interval maps of the cellular excitatory responses were generated for rectangular monophasic and symmetric biphasic field stimuli of 2, 5, 10, and 20 ms total duration. In contrast to previously documented current injection studies, our results demonstrate that a cardiac cell exhibits a significantly nonmonotonic excitatory response to premature monophasic and, to a much lesser degree, biphasic field stimuli. Furthermore, for monophasic stimuli at low field strengths, the cell is exquisitely sensitive to the timing of the shock, demonstrating a classic all-or-none depolarizing response. However, at higher field strengths this all-or-none sensitivity reverts to a more gradual transition of excitatory responses with respect to stimulus prematurity. In contrast, biphasic stimuli produce such graded responses at all suprathreshold stimulus strengths. Similar behaviors are demonstrated at all S2 stimulus durations tested. The generation of depolarizing (sodium) currents is triggered by one or more of the sharp field gradient changes produced at the stimulus edges-i.e., make, break, and transphasic (for biphasic stimuli)-with the magnitude of these edge-induced current contributions dependent on both the prematurity and the strength of the applied field. In all cases, however, depolarizing current arises from the partial removal of sodium inactivation from at least part of the cell, because of either the natural process of repolarization or a localized acceleration of this process by the impressed field.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  1996        PMID: 8785290      PMCID: PMC1225060          DOI: 10.1016/S0006-3495(96)79692-3

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Biophys J        ISSN: 0006-3495            Impact factor:   4.033


  42 in total

1.  Analysis of electric field stimulation of single cardiac muscle cells.

Authors:  L Tung; J R Borderies
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  1992-08       Impact factor: 4.033

2.  Reconstruction of the action potential of ventricular myocardial fibres.

Authors:  G W Beeler; H Reuter
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  1977-06       Impact factor: 5.182

3.  Direct current make and break thresholds for pacemaker electrodes on the canine ventricle.

Authors:  E Dekker
Journal:  Circ Res       Date:  1970-11       Impact factor: 17.367

4.  A bidomain model with periodic intracellular junctions: a one-dimensional analysis.

Authors:  N Trayanova; T C Pilkington
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  1993-05       Impact factor: 4.538

5.  Optical recordings of the effect of electrical stimulation on action potential repolarization and the induction of reentry in two-dimensional perfused rabbit epicardium.

Authors:  S B Knisley; B C Hill
Journal:  Circulation       Date:  1993-11       Impact factor: 29.690

6.  Optical measurements of transmembrane potential changes during electric field stimulation of ventricular cells.

Authors:  S B Knisley; T F Blitchington; B C Hill; A O Grant; W M Smith; T C Pilkington; R E Ideker
Journal:  Circ Res       Date:  1993-02       Impact factor: 17.367

7.  Transthoracic ventricular defibrillation in the 100 kg calf with symmetrical one-cycle bidirectional rectangular wave stimuli.

Authors:  J C Schuder; J H Gold; H Stoeckle; W C McDaniel; K N Cheung
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  1983-07       Impact factor: 4.538

8.  A model study of extracellular stimulation of cardiac cells.

Authors:  L J Leon; F A Roberge
Journal:  IEEE Trans Biomed Eng       Date:  1993-12       Impact factor: 4.538

9.  Epicardial mapping of ventricular defibrillation with monophasic and biphasic shocks in dogs.

Authors:  X Zhou; J P Daubert; P D Wolf; W M Smith; R E Ideker
Journal:  Circ Res       Date:  1993-01       Impact factor: 17.367

10.  A dynamic model of the cardiac ventricular action potential. I. Simulations of ionic currents and concentration changes.

Authors:  C H Luo; Y Rudy
Journal:  Circ Res       Date:  1994-06       Impact factor: 17.367

View more
  4 in total

1.  Spatial heterogeneity of transmembrane potential responses of single guinea-pig cardiac cells during electric field stimulation.

Authors:  Vinod Sharma; Leslie Tung
Journal:  J Physiol       Date:  2002-07-15       Impact factor: 5.182

2.  Paradoxical loss of excitation with high intensity pulses during electric field stimulation of single cardiac cells.

Authors:  Vinod Sharma; Robert C Susil; Leslie Tung
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2005-01-21       Impact factor: 4.033

3.  Stimulation of single isolated adult ventricular myocytes within a low volume using a planar microelectrode array.

Authors:  Norbert Klauke; Godfrey L Smith; Jon Cooper
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 4.033

4.  Deexcitation of cardiac cells.

Authors:  A Pumir; G Romey; V Krinsky
Journal:  Biophys J       Date:  1998-06       Impact factor: 4.033

  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.