Comparison of the Intrinsic Vasorelaxant and Inotropic Effects of the Antiarrhythmic Agents Vernakalant and Flecainide in Human Isolated Vascular and Cardiac Tissues
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study explored the intrinsic vasorelaxant and inotropic effects of the mixed potassium and sodium channel blocker atrial antiarrhythmic vernakalant and the class IC antiarrhythmic agent flecainide in human isolated subcutaneous resistance artery and in ventricular trabecular muscle preparations. At test concentrations encompassing free plasma concentrations associated with clinical efficacy for conversion of atrial fibrillation, vernakalant (1-10 μM) displayed no significant direct effects on human resistance artery tone or ventricular contractility. In contrast, tested at equimolar concentrations, flecainide significantly reduced peak isometric contractile force (10 μM) and maximal rates of force development and decline (3 and 10 μM) in the human ventricular muscle preparation while displaying no significant effect on human resistance artery tone. The lack of effects of vernakalant on human resistance artery tone and ventricular muscle contractile function suggests that direct vasorelaxant and inotropic effects do not underlie the rare hypotensive events observed clinically with vernakalant, raising the possibility that secondary (eg, reflex) effects may mediate these events. The demonstration of negative inotropic effects with flecainide in the human ventricular muscle preparations in the absence of an effect on resistance artery tone suggests that the hemodynamic effects of flecainide observed clinically result primarily from direct negative inotropic effects.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| 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) | 0.001 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".