Why the study?
Differences exist between human and porcine cellular electrophysiology, and the lack of a reliable computational model for pig ventricular myocytes hampers translating experimental results from pigs to human myocardium.
Developing a species-specific computational model of pig ventricular cardiomyocytes highlights significant electrophysiological differences from humans, aiding the translation of arrhythmogenic assessments from animal models to the clinic.
Pig models may not predict human EAD/DAD responses to ion channel block; supports species-specific modeling for translational arrhythmia research.
The pig is commonly used as an experimental model of human heart disease, including for the study of mechanisms of arrhythmia. However, there exist differences between human and porcine cellular electrophysiology: The pig action potential (AP) has a deeper phase-1 notch, a longer duration at 50% repolarization, and higher plateau potentials than human. Ionic differences underlying the AP include larger rapid delayed-rectifier and smaller inward-rectifier K+-currents (IKr and IK1 respectively) in humans. AP steady-state rate-dependence and restitution is steeper in pigs. Porcine Ca2+ transients can have two components, unlike human. Although a reliable computational model for human ventricular myocytes exists, one for pigs is lacking. This hampers translation from results obtained in pigs to human myocardium. Here, we developed a computational model of the pig ventricular cardiomyocyte AP using experimental datasets of the relevant ionic currents, Ca2+-handling, AP shape, AP duration restitution, and inducibility of triggered activity and alternans. To properly capture porcine Ca2+ transients, we introduced a two-step process with a faster release in the t-tubular region, followed by a slower diffusion-induced release from a non t-tubular subcellular region. The pig model behavior was compared with that of a human ventricular cardiomyocyte (O'Hara-Rudy) model. The pig, but not the human model, developed early afterdepolarizations (EADs) under block of IK1, while IKr block led to EADs in the human but not in the pig model. At fast rates (pacing cycle length = 400 ms), the human cell model was more susceptible to spontaneous Ca2+ release-mediated delayed afterdepolarizations (DADs) and triggered activity than pig. Fast pacing led to alternans in human but not pig. Developing species-specific models incorporating electrophysiology and Ca2+-handling provides a tool to aid translating antiarrhythmic and arrhythmogenic assessment from the bench to the clinic.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Gaur et al. (2021) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: