Novel Optics-Based Approaches for Cardiac Electrophysiology: A Review
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Optical techniques for recording and manipulating cellular electrophysiology have advanced rapidly in just a few decades. These developments allow for the analysis of cardiac cellular dynamics at multiple scales while largely overcoming the drawbacks associated with the use of electrodes. The recent advent of optogenetics opens up new possibilities for regional and tissue-level electrophysiological control and hold promise for future novel clinical applications. This article, which emerged from the international NOTICE workshop in 2018, reviews the state-of-the-art optical techniques used for cardiac electrophysiological research and the underlying biophysics. The design and performance of optical reporters and optogenetic actuators are reviewed along with limitations of current probes. The physics of light interaction with cardiac tissue is detailed and associated challenges with the use of optical sensors and actuators are presented. Case studies include the use of fluorescence recovery after photobleaching and super-resolution microscopy to explore the micro-structure of cardiac cells and a review of two photon and light sheet technologies applied to cardiac tissue. The emergence of cardiac optogenetics is reviewed and the current work exploring the potential clinical use of optogenetics is also described. Approaches which combine optogenetic manipulation and optical voltage measurement are discussed, in terms of platforms that allow real-time manipulation of whole heart electrophysiology in open and closed-loop systems to study optimal ways to terminate spiral arrhythmias. The design and operation of optics-based approaches that allow high-throughput cardiac electrophysiological assays is presented. Finally, emerging techniques of photo-acoustic imaging and stress sensors are described along with strategies for future development and establishment of these techniques in mainstream electrophysiological research.
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 | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.003 |
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".