MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort

Local Anesthetics Induce Cardiac Toxicity Through Distinct Effects on Calcium Dynamics: Implications For Clinical Prevention

2019· article· en· W3176440207 on OpenAlexafffundabout
Julia Plakhotnik, Libo Zhang, Per‐Arne Lönnqvist, Jason T. Maynes

Bibliographic record

VenueThe FASEB Journal · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMedicine
TopicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias
Canadian institutionsSickKids FoundationUniversity of Toronto
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsContractilityToxicityPharmacologySafety pharmacologyAsystoleMedicineAnesthesiaCalciumInotropeSodium channelContraction (grammar)Calcium channelChemistryCardiologyInternal medicineSodiumDrug

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

INTRODUCTION The clinically safe dose of local anesthetics is limited by their induction of potentially lethal cardiac arrhythmias, which occurs in ~50,000 people in the US per year. While this drug toxicity is often attributed to non‐specific block of cardiac sodium channels, studies on isolated channels fail to show any clinically relevant difference between more harmful (i.e. bupivacaine, BUP) and less harmful (i.e. ropivacaine, ROP) anesthetics. We sought to determine the mechanisms of toxicity and arrhythmogenesis for BUP and ROP, revealing prevention and treatment strategies to improve clinical safety. METHODS We cultured beating 2D‐tissues of human iPSC‐derived cardiomyocytes and treated them with clinically relevant concentrations of BUP or ROP. We then analyzed changes to ion and contractile dynamics using the xCELLigence RTCA Cardio and the cytosolic calcium dye FLIPR5. As an inotrope, calcium was tested for its ability to recover contractile dysfunction. Our in vitro findings were validated in a rat model of BUP toxicity. Anesthetized animals were infused with either saline or CaCl 2 (10 mg/kg over 5 min) in the tail vein, followed by either 2 mg/kg/min BUP or ROP, until asystole. Cardiac activity was monitored via ECG and invasive arterial blood pressure recordings, and analysed using non‐linear regression incorporating the effects of drug treatment, sampling time, and animal variability. RESULTS In human iPSC cardiomyocytes, both anesthetics affected contractility, beat rate, rhythm, excitation‐contraction coupling, and sodium channel activity as expected, with BUP causing a greater adverse effect. BUP, but not ROP, additionally delayed calcium wave duration by 20% and reduced overall calcium flux by 66%. Interestingly, CaCl 2 co‐treatment with BUP abolished aberrancy in all toxicity metrics, where CaCl 2 co‐treatment with ROP exacerbated toxicity. Further investigation into intracellular calcium dynamics revealed BUP‐specific defects in diastolic and systolic calcium flux, which were mitigated by CaCl 2 co‐treatment. Our in vivo model validated these findings, with ROP showing less toxicity than BUP in all observed metrics. CaCl 2 pre‐treatment mitigated the BUP‐mediated decline in beat rate and diastolic arterial pressure, but had no effect, or exacerbated outcomes, in ROP‐treated rats. Furthermore, CaCl 2 pre‐treatment reduced arrhythmia onset and QRS widening cased by BUP, but exacerbated these arrhythmia metrics and reduced survival with ROP. CONCLUSIONS We found that BUP, but not ROP, caused a baseline dysfunction in calcium dynamics in human iPSC‐derived cardiomyocytes. Calcium pre‐treatment prevented BUP, but exacerbated ROP cardiotoxicity in both in vitro and in vivo models. Together, our results implicate distinct calcium signaling and dynamics in eliciting the higher clinical cardiotoxicity of the BUP local anesthetic, and show how calcium can be used to protect against the arrhythmogenic effects of BUP overdose. Support or Funding Information Canadian Institutes of Health Research This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2019 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal .

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.009

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0030.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.034
GPT teacher head0.357
Teacher spread0.323 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2019
Admission routes3
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe FASEB Journal→Same topicCardiac electrophysiology and arrhythmias→French-language works237,207→