Key result
Blood-perfused working rabbit hearts had significantly longer action potential duration at low afterload compared with buffer-perfused hearts (177 vs 114 ms, P<0.001) and were more stable.
Why the study?
Does blood-buffer perfusion improve electrophysiological stability compared to crystalloid buffer in isolated working rabbit hearts?
Does blood-buffer perfusion improve electrophysiological stability compared to crystalloid buffer in isolated working rabbit hearts?
Absolute Event Rate: 177% vs 114%
p-value: p=< 0.001
Blood-perfused isolated working rabbit hearts are electrophysiologically more stable and less prone to ventricular fibrillation than those perfused with crystalloid buffer.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Supports blood perfusion for stability in isolated rabbit heart models; leaves open translation to human electrophysiology.
Gillis et al. (1996) studied Isolated working rabbit hearts. Blood plus Krebs-Henseleit buffer vs. Krebs-Henseleit buffer was evaluated on Left ventricular monophasic action potential duration (APD) at low afterload and high cardiac output (p=< 0.001). Blood-perfused working rabbit hearts had significantly longer action potential duration at low afterload compared with buffer-perfused hearts (177 vs 114 ms, P<0.001) and were more stable.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: