PulseExploreJournal ClubDebatesTrendingResearchersJournals
Instagram
HomeExploreJournal ClubTrending
Synapse
⌘+K
Synapse
May 31, 2016Scientific Reports57 citationsOpen Access

Connexin43 contributes to electrotonic conduction across scar tissue in the intact heart

VMVanessa M. MahoneyVMValeria MezzanoGMGary R. Mirams

Key Result

Fibroblast-specific deletion of Connexin43 significantly reduced the maximal signal amplitude of electrotonic conduction in cardiac scar tissue to 12% compared to 61% in wild-type controls.

Structured PICO

P
Population
2-4 month old male C57BL6 mice, and 2-4 month old male mice with fibroblast-specific protein 1 deletion of Cx43 (Cx43fsp1KO) alongside littermate Cx43flox/flox Cre negative controls, subjected to direct current-induced right ventricular injury or left ventricular cryoinjury.
I
Intervention
Fibroblast-specific deletion of Connexin43 (Cx43fsp1KO)
C
Comparator
Wild-type C57BL6 mice and littermate Cx43flox/flox Cre negative mice with intact Connexin43
O
Outcome
Electrotonic coupling between scar tissue and uninjured myocardium, assessed by optical mapping and microelectrode recordings of transmembrane voltage changessurrogate

Non-myocytes in ventricular scar tissue electrically couple to surrounding myocytes to support passive conduction of action potentials, a process dependent on Connexin43 expression.

Main Result

Absolute Event Rate: 12% vs 61%

p-value: p=<0.05

Limitations

  • Additional studies are needed to identify the specific cell types responsible for electrotonic coupling between the cells in the scars and myocytes.
  • A small number of surviving myocytes may have been present in some scars, which could facilitate passive conduction.
  • The injury techniques used may generate an injury response that differs from the response initiated by ischemic injury.
  • Fsp1 is expressed in a variety of cell types, so other functional changes cannot be excluded.
  • Current delivery with suction electrodes could have resulted in changes in the extracellular field.

Abstract

Studies have demonstrated non-myocytes, including fibroblasts, can electrically couple to myocytes in culture. However, evidence demonstrating current can passively spread across scar tissue in the intact heart remains elusive. We hypothesize electrotonic conduction occurs across non-myocyte gaps in the heart and is partly mediated by Connexin43 (Cx43). We investigated whether non-myocytes in ventricular scar tissue are electrically connected to surrounding myocardial tissue in wild type and fibroblast-specific protein-1 driven conditional Cx43 knock-out mice (Cx43fsp1KO). Electrical coupling between the scar and uninjured myocardium was demonstrated by injecting current into the myocardium and recording depolarization in the scar through optical mapping. Coupling was significantly reduced in Cx43fsp1KO hearts. Voltage signals were recorded using microelectrodes from control scars but no signals were obtained from Cx43fsp1KO hearts. Recordings showed significantly decreased amplitude, depolarized resting membrane potential, increased duration and reduced upstroke velocity compared to surrounding myocytes, suggesting that the non-excitable cells in the scar closely follow myocyte action potentials. These results were further validated by mathematical simulations. Optical mapping demonstrated that current delivered within the scar could induce activation of the surrounding myocardium. These data demonstrate non-myocytes in the scar are electrically coupled to myocytes, and coupling depends on Cx43 expression.

Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper

Cite This Study

Mahoney et al. (2016) studied Cardiac scar tissue / Myocardial injury. Fibroblast-specific deletion of Connexin43 (Cx43fsp1KO) vs. Littermate Cx43flox/flox Cre negative mice (controls) was evaluated on Maximal signal amplitude in the scar relative to the myocardium near the electrode (p=<0.05). Fibroblast-specific deletion of Connexin43 significantly reduced the maximal signal amplitude of electrotonic conduction in cardiac scar tissue to 12% compared to 61% in wild-type controls.

synapsesocial.com/papers/6a12b4ed2a15bedf5103a45bhttps://doi.org/10.1038/srep26744
Ask AI
Helpful
Bookmark
Share
View Full Paper