Key result
Pilsicainide (10 μM) decreased conduction velocity to 81.2% of control in the pulmonary vein and 87.2% in the left atrium at a pacing cycle length of 1000 ms.
Why the study?
Does pilsicainide alter conduction velocity and effective refractory period differently in the pulmonary vein compared to the left atrium in guinea pig models?
Population
Isolated pulmonary vein and left atrium preparations from guinea pigs
Comparison
Pilsicainide (10 µM) vs Left atrium preparation
Design
Preclinical
Authors
Loading...
May indicate weaker pulmonary vein anti-reentry action; leaves open translation to human atrial fibrillation therapies.
Does pilsicainide alter conduction velocity and effective refractory period differently in the pulmonary vein compared to the left atrium in guinea pig models?
p-value: p=<0.05
Pilsicainide exhibits differential electrophysiological effects on the pulmonary vein versus the left atrium, suggesting its anti-reentry effects may be weaker in the pulmonary vein.
Takahara et al. (2012) studied Normal cardiac tissue (Atrial fibrillation model context). Pilsicainide vs. Pre-drug control was evaluated on Conduction velocity and effective refractory period (p=<0.05). Pilsicainide (10 μM) decreased conduction velocity to 81.2% of control in the pulmonary vein and 87.2% in the left atrium at a pacing cycle length of 1000 ms.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: