Why the study?
Calcium sparks are the elementary events of excitation-contraction coupling, yet they are not explicitly represented in human ventricular myocyte models.
A novel stochastic human ventricular myocyte model successfully simulates spontaneous calcium release events and frequency-dependent ion channel responses.
Model validation in silico; leaves open clinical translation pending human tissue validation.
Calcium (Ca2+) sparks are the elementary events of excitation–contraction coupling, yet they are not explicitly represented in human ventricular myocyte models. A stochastic ventricular cardiomyocyte human model that adapts to intracellular Ca2+ ([Ca2+]i) dynamics, spark regulation, and frequency-dependent changes in the form of locally controlled Ca2+ release was developed. The 20,000 CRUs in this model are composed of 9 individual LCCs and 49 RyRs that function as couplons. The simulated action potential duration at 1 Hz steady-state pacing is ~0.280 s similar to human ventricular cell recordings. Rate-dependence experiments reveal that APD shortening mechanisms are largely contributed by the L-type calcium channel inactivation, RyR open fraction, and [Ca2+]myo concentrations. The dynamic slow-rapid-slow pacing protocol shows that RyR open probability during high pacing frequency (2.5 Hz) switches to an adapted “nonconducting” form of Ca2+-dependent transition state. The predicted force was also observed to be increased in high pacing, but the SR Ca2+ fractional release was lower due to the smaller difference between diastolic and systolic [Ca2+]SR. Restitution analysis through the S1S2 protocol and increased LCC Ca2+-dependent activation rate show that the duration of LCC opening helps modulate its effects on the APD restitution at different diastolic intervals. Ultimately, a longer duration of calcium sparks was observed in relation to the SR Ca2+ loading at high pacing rates. Overall, this study demonstrates the spontaneous Ca2+ release events and ion channel responses throughout various stimuli.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Alvarez et al. (2023) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: