4.7 Article

Endocardial versus epicardial differences in L-type calcium current in canine ventricular myocytes studied by action potential voltage clamp

期刊

CARDIOVASCULAR RESEARCH
卷 58, 期 1, 页码 66-75

出版社

OXFORD UNIV PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/S0008-6363(02)00853-2

关键词

Ca-channel; ion channels; membrane currents; membrane potential; myocytes

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives: The aim of the present study was to assess and compare the dynamics of L-type Ca2+ current (I-Ca.L) during physiologic action potential (AP) in canine ventricular cardiomyocytes of epicardial (EPI) and endocardial (ENDO) origin. Methods: I-Ca.L was recorded on cells derived from the two regions of the heart using both AP voltage clamp and conventional whole cell voltage clamp techniques. Results: AP voltage clamp experiments revealed that the decay of I-Ca.L is monotonic during endocardial AP, whereas the current is double-peaked (displaying a second rise) during epicardial AP. The amplitude of the first peak was significantly greater in ENDO (-4.6+/-0.8 pA/pF) than in EPI cells (-2.8+/-0.3 pA/pF). Application of epicardial APs as command pulses to endocardial cells yielded double-peaked I-Ca.L profiles, and increased the net charge entry carried by I-Ca.L during the AP from 0.187+/-0.059 to 0.262+/-0.056 pC/pF (n=5, P<0.05). No differences were observed in current densities and inactivation kinetics of I-Ca.L between EPI and ENDO cells when studied under conventional voltage clamp conditions. Nisoldipine shortened action potentials and eliminated the dome of the epicardial AP. Conclusion: I-Ca.L was shown to partially inactivate before and deactivate during phase-1 repolarization and reopening of these channels is responsible for the formation of the dome in canine EPI cells. The transmural differences in the profile of I-Ca.L could be well explained with differences in AP configuration. (C) 2003 European Society of Cardiology. Published by Elsevier Science B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据