Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27486348›Full record

ReviewClinical Medicine Insights. Cardiology2016

Computational Representations of Myocardial Infarct Scars and Implications for Arrhythmogenesis.

Adam J Connolly, Martin J Bishop

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical Medicine Insights. Cardiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 21 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
21citing 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

21 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Calcium Dynamics and Cardiac Arrhythmia.Clinical Medicine Insights. Cardiology · 2017
    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

2 authors.

Adam J ConnollyDepartment of Imaging Sciences and Bioengineering, King's College London, St Thomas' Hospital, London, UK.
Martin J BishopDepartment of Imaging Sciences and Bioengineering, King's College London, St Thomas' Hospital, London, UK.

Funding

British Heart Foundation PG/14/66/30927Medical Research Council MC_PC_15031Medical Research Council MR/N011007/1Wellcome Trust
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Image-based computational modeling is becoming an increasingly used clinical tool to provide insight into the mechanisms of reentrant arrhythmias. In the context of ischemic heart disease, faithful representation of the electrophysiological properties of the infarct region within models is essential, due to the scars known for arrhythmic properties. Here, we review the different computational representations of the infarcted region, summarizing the experimental measurements upon which they are based. We then focus on the two most common representations of the scar core (complete insulator or electrically passive tissue) and perform simulations of electrical propagation around idealized infarct geometries. Our simulations highlight significant differences in action potential duration and focal effective refractory period (ERP) around the scar, driven by differences in electrotonic loading, depending on the choice of scar representation. Finally, a novel mechanism for arrhythmia induction, following a focal ectopic beat, is demonstrated, which relies on localized gradients in ERP directly caused by the electrotonic sink effects of the neighboring passive scar.

Indexed as

arrhythmiacomputational modelinginfarctmonodomainscar

Identifiers

PMID27486348
PMCPMC4962962

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.