Potential Ionic Mechanism for Repolarization Differences Between Canine Right and Left Atrium
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Experimental and clinical evidence suggests a critical role for the left atrium (LA) in atrial fibrillation (AF). In animal models, repolarization is faster in the LA than in the right atrium (RA), leading to more stable reentry circuits with a shorter intrinsic period in the LA. The ionic mechanisms underlying LA-RA repolarization differences are unknown. Therefore, we evaluated ionic currents and action potentials (APs) with the whole-cell patch clamp in isolated canine atrial myocytes. The density of the rapid delayed rectifier current (I(Kr)) was greater in the LA (eg, 1.83+/-0.10 pA/pF at +20 mV) than in the RA (1.15+/-0.07 pA/pF, P<0.01; n=16 cells per group). The slow and ultrarapid delayed rectifier, the inward rectifier, L-type Ca(2+), and transient outward K(+) currents were all comparable in the LA and RA. There were no differences in kinetic or voltage-dependent properties of currents in LA versus RA. Western blots of ether-a-go-go-related gene (ERG) protein in three RA and corresponding LA regions showed significantly greater ERG expression in LA. AP duration (APD) was shorter in the LA versus RA in both isolated cells and multicellular preparations, and the effective refractory period (ERP) was shorter in the LA compared with the RA in vivo. Dofetilide had significantly larger APD- and ERP-increasing effects in the LA compared with RA, and LA-RA repolarization differences were eliminated by exposure to dofetilide. We conclude that LA myocytes have larger I(Kr) than do RA myocytes, contributing importantly to the shorter APD and ERP in LA. The larger LA I(Kr) may participate in the ability of the LA to act as a "driver region" for AF, with potentially important implications for understanding AF mechanisms and antiarrhythmic therapy.
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 | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| 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".