Key result
Electrically induced fibrillation increases oxygen consumption in the isolated nonworking dog heart compared to rhythmical contraction, independent of the electric stimulus itself.
Why the study?
Does electrically induced fibrillation increase oxygen consumption in the completely isolated nonworking dog heart compared to rhythmical contraction?
Does electrically induced fibrillation increase oxygen consumption in the completely isolated nonworking dog heart compared to rhythmical contraction?
In an isolated nonworking dog heart model, fibrillation inherently increases oxygen demand compared to normal rhythmical contraction.
Fibrillation may elevate myocardial O2 demand independent of contraction; leaves open relevance to working hearts in vivo.
Evidence is presented, that in the completely isolated nonworking dog heart oxygen consumption is higher during a period of electrically induced fibrillation than during a period of rhythmical contraction and that this increase is not due to the electric stimulus per se.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Jardetzky et al. (1956) studied this question. Electrically induced fibrillation increases oxygen consumption in the isolated nonworking dog heart compared to rhythmical contraction, independent of the electric stimulus itself.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: