In Situ Confocal Imaging in Intact Heart Reveals Stress-Induced Ca <sup>2+</sup> Release Variability in a Murine Catecholaminergic Polymorphic Ventricular Tachycardia Model of Type 2 Ryanodine Receptor <sup>R4496C+/−</sup> Mutation
Bibliographic record
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia is directly linked to mutations in proteins (eg, type 2 ryanodine receptor [RyR2](R4496C)) responsible for intracellular Ca(2+) homeostasis in the heart. However, the mechanism of Ca(2+) release dysfunction underlying catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia has only been investigated in isolated cells but not in the in situ undisrupted myocardium. METHODS AND RESULTS: We investigated in situ myocyte Ca(2+) dynamics in intact Langendorff-perfused hearts (ex vivo) from wild-type and RyR2(R4496C+/-) mice using laser scanning confocal microscopy. We found that myocytes from both wild-type and RyR2(R4496C+/-) hearts displayed uniform, synchronized Ca(2+) transients. Ca(2+) transients from beat to beat were comparable in amplitude with identical activation and decay kinetics in wild-type and RyR2(R4496C+/-) hearts, suggesting that excitation-contraction coupling between the sarcolemmal Ca(2+) channels and mutated RyR2(R4496C+/-) channels remains intact under baseline resting conditions. On adrenergic stimulation, RyR2(R4496C+/-) hearts exhibited a high degree of Ca(2+) release variability. The varied pattern of Ca(2+) release was absent in single isolated myocytes, independent of cell cycle length, synchronized among neighboring myocytes, and correlated with catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia. A similar pattern of action potential variability, which was synchronized among neighboring myocytes, was also revealed under adrenergic stress in intact hearts but not in isolated myocytes. CONCLUSIONS: Our studies using an in situ confocal imaging approach suggest that mutated RyR2s are functionally normal at rest but display a high degree of Ca(2+) release variability on intense adrenergic stimulation. Ca(2+) release variability is a Ca(2+) release abnormality, resulting from electric defects rather than the failure of the Ca(2+) release response to action potentials in mutated ventricular myocytes. Our data provide important insights into Ca(2+) release and electric dysfunction in an established model of catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".