Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35496454›Full record

ArticleHeart rhythm O22022

Effect of scar and pacing location on repolarization in a porcine myocardial infarction model.

Mark K Elliott, Caroline Mendonca Costa, John Whitaker, Philip Gemmell, Vishal S Mehta, Baldeep S Sidhu, Justin Gould, Steven E Williams, Mark O'Neill, Reza Razavi and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Heart rhythm O2, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.2field-weighted citation impact, top 54% of its field
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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 2 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Computer-aided characterization of the arrhythmogenic substrate after myocardial infarction.Europace : European pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac electrophysiology : journal of the working groups on cardiac pacing, arrhythmias, and cardiac cellular electrophysiology of the European Society of Cardiology · 2026
    Review
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

13 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Mark K ElliottSchool of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Caroline Mendonca CostaSchool of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
John WhitakerSchool of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Philip GemmellSchool of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Vishal S MehtaSchool of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Baldeep S SidhuSchool of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Justin GouldSchool of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Steven E WilliamsSchool of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Mark O'NeillSchool of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Reza RazaviSchool of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Steven NiedererSchool of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Martin J BishopSchool of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
Christopher A RinaldiSchool of Biomedical Engineering and Imaging Sciences, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.
King's College London · GB

Funding

British Heart Foundation FS/20/26/34952Medical Research Council MC_PC_19041Medical Research Council MR/N001877/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: The effect of chronic ischemic scar on repolarization is unclear, with conflicting results from human and animal studies. An improved understanding of electrical remodeling within scar and border zone tissue may enhance substrate-guided ablation techniques for treatment of ventricular tachycardia. Computational modeling studies have suggested increased dispersion of repolarization during epicardial, but not endocardial, left ventricular pacing, in close proximity to scar. However, the effect of endocardial pacing near scar Objective: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effect of scar and pacing location on local repolarization in a porcine myocardial infarction model. Methods: Six model pigs underwent late gadolinium enhancement cardiac magnetic resonance (LGE-CMR) imaging followed by electroanatomic mapping of the left ventricular endocardium. LGE-CMR images were registered to the anatomic shell and scar defined by LGE. Activation recovery intervals (ARIs), a surrogate for action potential duration, and local ARI gradients were calculated from unipolar electrograms within areas of late gadolinium enhancement (aLGE) and healthy myocardium. Results: There was no significant difference between aLGE and healthy myocardium in mean ARI (304.20 ± 19.44 ms vs 300.59 ± 19.22 ms; Conclusion: Our findings suggest that changes in ARI are not an intrinsic property of surviving myocytes within scar, and endocardial pacing close to scar does not affect local repolarization.

Indexed as

Cardiac magnetic resonance imagingElectroanatomic mappingMyocardial scarRepolarizationVentricular arrhythmia

Identifiers

PMID35496454
PMCPMC9043407
OpenAlexW4210741787

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.