Why the study?
Does low-amplitude, high-frequency overdrive pacing combined with calcium channel blockers suppress spiral wave chaos in a computational cardiac model?
Does low-amplitude, high-frequency overdrive pacing combined with calcium channel blockers suppress spiral wave chaos in a computational cardiac model?
Computational modeling suggests that low-amplitude, high-frequency overdrive pacing combined with calcium channel blockers may be a feasible strategy for eliminating ventricular fibrillation.
May support combined overdrive pacing and calcium channel blockade for spiral wave suppression in models; leaves open clinical translation to VF.
Recent findings indicate that ventricular fibrillation might arise from spiral wave chaos. Our objective in this computational study was to investigate wave interactions in excitable media and to explore the feasibility of using overdrive pacing to suppress spiral wave chaos. This work is based on the finding that in excitable media, propagating waves with the highest excitation frequency eventually overtake all other waves. We analyzed the effects of low-amplitude, high-frequency pacing in one-dimensional and two-dimensional networks of coupled, excitable cells governed by the Luo-Rudy model. In the one-dimensional cardiac model, we found narrow high-frequency regions of 1:1 synchronization between the input stimulus and the system's response. The frequencies in this region were higher than the intrinsic spiral wave frequency of cardiac tissue. When we paced the two-dimensional cardiac model with frequencies from this region, we found that spiral wave chaos could, in some cases, be suppressed. When we coupled the overdrive pacing with calcium channel blockers, we found that spiral wave chaos could be suppressed in all cases. These findings suggest that low-amplitude, high-frequency overdrive pacing, in combination with calcium channel inhibitors (e.g., class II or class IV antiarrhythmic drugs), may be useful for eliminating fibrillation.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Stamp et al. (2002) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: