ArticleScientific reports2022
Arrhythmogenic influence of mutations in a myocyte-based computational model of the pulmonary vein sleeve.
Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 18 citations in OpenAlex.
- Determining properties of human-induced pluripotent stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes using spatially resolved electromechanical metrics.The Journal of physiology · 2026Article
- Reduced gap junction coupling amplifies the effects of cardiomyocyte variability and destabilizes the heartbeat.Physiological reports · 2025Article
- Evaluating computational efforts and physiological resolution of mathematical models of cardiac tissue.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- A possible path to persistent re-entry waves at the outlet of the left pulmonary vein.NPJ systems biology and applications · 2024Article
- Cardiac computed tomography angiography-derived pulmonary vein volumetry as a predictor for atrial fibrillation recurrence after catheter ablation.Quantitative imaging in medicine and surgery · 2024Article
- Efficient, cell-based simulations of cardiac electrophysiology; The Kirchhoff Network Model (KNM).NPJ systems biology and applications · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In the heart, electrophysiological dysregulation arises from defects at many biological levels (from point mutations in ion channel proteins to gross structural abnormalities). These defects disrupt the normal pattern of electrical activation, producing ectopic activity and reentrant arrhythmia. To interrogate mechanisms that link these primary biological defects to macroscopic electrophysiologic dysregulation most prior computational studies have utilized either (i) detailed models of myocyte ion channel dynamics at limited spatial scales, or (ii) homogenized models of action potential conduction that reproduce arrhythmic activity at tissue and organ levels. Here we apply our recent model (EMI), which integrates electrical activation and propagation across these scales, to study human atrial arrhythmias originating in the pulmonary vein (PV) sleeves. These small structures initiate most supraventricular arrhythmias and include pronounced myocyte-to-myocyte heterogeneities in ion channel expression and intercellular coupling. To test EMI's cell-based architecture in this physiological context we asked whether ion channel mutations known to underlie atrial fibrillation are capable of initiating arrhythmogenic behavior via increased excitability or reentry in a schematic PV sleeve geometry. Our results illustrate that EMI's improved spatial resolution can directly interrogate how electrophysiological changes at the individual myocyte level manifest in tissue and as arrhythmia in the PV sleeve.
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.