Why the study?
Pathological circumstances may open connexin hemichannels and close gap junctions, but the emerging role of hemichannels in myocardial ischemia and arrhythmia warranted a review of cellular pro-arrhythmic evidence and molecular control.
null
null
null
Effect estimate: null (95% CI null)
p-value: p=null
A dual approach of preventing connexin hemichannel opening while preserving gap junction function represents a promising experimental strategy for treating ischemic heart disease and arrhythmias.
Gap19 infarct reduction in rats supports targeted hemichannel research; leaves open clinical translation and safety in humans.
Connexins are crucial cardiac proteins that form hemichannels and gap junctions. Gap junctions are responsible for the propagation of electrical and chemical signals between myocardial cells and cells of the specialized conduction system in order to synchronize the cardiac cycle and steer cardiac pump function. Gap junctions are normally open, while hemichannels are closed, but pathological circumstances may close gap junctions and open hemichannels, thereby perturbing cardiac function and homeostasis. Current evidence demonstrates an emerging role of hemichannels in myocardial ischemia and arrhythmia, and tools are now available to selectively inhibit hemichannels without inhibiting gap junctions as well as to stimulate hemichannel incorporation into gap junctions. We review available experimental evidence for hemichannel contributions to cellular pro-arrhythmic events in ventricular and atrial cardiomyocytes, and link these to insights at the level of molecular control of connexin-43-based hemichannel opening. We conclude that a double-edged approach of both preventing hemichannel opening and preserving gap junctional function will be key for further research and development of new connexin-based experimental approaches for treating heart disease.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Leybaert et al. (2023) conducted a null in Cardiac ischemia and arrhythmias. Gap19 vs. Control was evaluated on Infarct size reduction (null, 95% CI null, p=null).
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: