4.6 Article

An infrared optical pacing system for screening cardiac electrophysiology in human cardiomyocytes

Journal

PLOS ONE
Volume 12, Issue 8, Pages -

Publisher

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0183761

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. National Institutes of Health [HL123012, HL118807, HL126747, T32EB007509]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Human cardiac myocytes derived from pluripotent stem cells (hCM) have invigorated interest in genetic disease mechanisms and cardiac safety testing; however, the technology to fully assess electrophysiological function in an assay that is amenable to high throughput screening has lagged. We describe a fully contactless system using optical pacing with an infrared (IR) laser and multi-site high fidelity fluorescence imaging to assess multiple electrophysiological parameters from hCM monolayers in a standard 96-well plate. Simultaneous multi-site action potentials (FluoVolt) or Ca2+ transients (Fluo4-AM) were measured, from which high resolution maps of conduction velocity and action potential duration (APD) were obtained in a single well. Energy thresholds for optical pacing were determined for cell plating density, laser spot size, pulse width, and wavelength and found to be within ranges reported previously for reliable pacing. Action potentials measured using FluoVolt and a microelectrode exhibited the same morphology and rate of depolarization. Importantly, we show that this can be achieved accurately with minimal damage to hCM due to optical pacing or fluorescence excitation. Finally, using this assay we demonstrate that hCM exhibit reproducible changes in repolarization and impulse conduction velocity for Flecainide and Quinidine, two well described reference compounds. In conclusion, we demonstrate a high fidelity electrophysiological screening assay that incorporates optical pacing with IR light to control beating rate of hCM monolayers.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available