Evidence map›Paper›PMID 23870273›Full record

ArticleBiophysical journal2013

Diastolic field stimulation: the role of shock duration in epicardial activation and propagation.

Marcella C Woods, Ilija Uzelac, Mark R Holcomb, John P Wikswo, Veniamin Y Sidorov

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biophysical journal, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Marcella C WoodsDepartment of Biomedical Engineering, Vanderbilt University, Nashville, Tennessee, USA.
Ilija Uzelac
Mark R Holcomb
John P Wikswo
Veniamin Y Sidorov

Funding

ELECTROPHYSIOLOGICAL IMPLICATIONS OF CARDIAC BIDOMAINR01HL058241 · NHLBI · VANDERBILT UNIVERSITY · PI BAUDENBACHER, FRANZ JOSEF, GRAY, RICHARD A. · 1997 to 2010
$4.0M
NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL058241NHLBI NIH HHS R01 HL58241-11
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Detailed knowledge of tissue response to both systolic and diastolic shock is critical for understanding defibrillation. Diastolic field stimulation has been much less studied than systolic stimulation, particularly regarding transient virtual anodes. Here we investigated high-voltage-induced polarization and activation patterns in response to strong diastolic shocks of various durations and of both polarities, and tested the hypothesis that the activation versus shock duration curve contains a local minimum for moderate shock durations, and it grows for short and long durations. We found that 0.1-0.2-ms shocks produced slow and heterogeneous activation. During 0.8-1 ms shocks, the activation was very fast and homogeneous. Further shock extension to 8 ms delayed activation from 1.55 ± 0.27 ms and 1.63 ± 0.21 ms at 0.8 ms shock to 2.32 ± 0.41 ms and 2.37 ± 0.3 ms (N = 7) for normal and opposite polarities, respectively. The traces from hyperpolarized regions during 3-8 ms shocks exhibited four different phases: beginning negative polarization, fast depolarization, slow depolarization, and after-shock increase in upstroke velocity. Thus, the shocks of >3 ms in duration created strong hyperpolarization associated with significant delay (P < 0.05) in activation compared with moderate shocks of 0.8 and 1 ms. This effect appears as a dip in the activation-versus-shock-duration curve.

Indexed as

DiastoleElectric CountershockModels, CardiovascularAnimalsEpicardial MappingIn Vitro TechniquesMyocardial Perfusion ImagingPericardiumRabbitsTime Factors

Identifiers

PMID23870273
PMCPMC3714876

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.