ArticlePloS one2021
Parameter variations in personalized electrophysiological models of human heart ventricles.
Article in PloS one, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Body surface potential driven personalisation of electrophysiological digital twins in hypertrophic cardiomyopathy.PLoS computational biology · 2026Article
- Current trends in virtual electrophysiology use for risk stratification and treatment of ventricular arrhythmias.Frontiers in cardiovascular medicine · 2025Review
- Computational modeling of cardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmogenesis: toward clinical translation.Physiological reviews · 2024Review
- Whole-heart ventricular arrhythmia modeling moving forward: Mechanistic insights and translational applications.Biophysics reviews · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objectives of this study were to evaluate the accuracy of personalized numerical simulations of the electrical activity in human ventricles by comparing simulated electrocardiograms (ECGs) with real patients' ECGs and analyzing the sensitivity of the model output to variations in the model parameters. We used standard 12-lead ECGs and up to 224 unipolar body-surface ECGs to record three patients with cardiac resynchronization therapy devices and three patients with focal ventricular tachycardia. Patient-tailored geometrical models of the ventricles, atria, large vessels, liver, and spine were created using computed tomography data. Ten cases of focal ventricular activation were simulated using the bidomain model and the TNNP 2006 cellular model. The population-based values of electrical conductivities and other model parameters were used for accuracy analysis, and their variations were used for sensitivity analysis. The mean correlation coefficient between the simulated and real ECGs varied significantly (from r = 0.29 to r = 0.86) among the simulated cases. A strong mean correlation (r > 0.7) was found in eight of the ten model cases. The accuracy of the ECG simulation varied widely in the same patient depending on the localization of the excitation origin. The sensitivity analysis revealed that variations in the anisotropy ratio, blood conductivity, and cellular apicobasal heterogeneity had the strongest influence on transmembrane potential, while variation in lung conductivity had the greatest influence on body-surface ECGs. Futhermore, the anisotropy ratio predominantly affected the latest activation time and repolarization time dispersion, while the cellular apicobasal heterogeneity mainly affected the dispersion of action potential duration, and variation in lung conductivity mainly led to changes in the amplitudes of ECGs and cardiac electrograms. We also found that the effects of certain parameter variations had specific regional patterns on the cardiac and body surfaces. These observations are useful for further developing personalized cardiac models.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.