2012
DOI: 10.3389/fphys.2012.00345
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Cardiac electrophysiology in mice: a matter of size

Abstract: Over the last decade, mouse models have become a popular instrument for studying cardiac arrhythmias. This review assesses in which respects a mouse heart is a miniature human heart, a suitable model for studying mechanisms of cardiac arrhythmias in humans and in which respects human and murine hearts differ. Section I considers the issue of scaling of mammalian cardiac (electro) physiology to body mass. Then, we summarize differences between mice and humans in cardiac activation (section II) and the currents … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

8
126
1

Year Published

2013
2013
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 158 publications
(140 citation statements)
references
References 287 publications
(383 reference statements)
8
126
1
Order By: Relevance
“…SNRT sinus node recovery time, SNRTc corrected sinus node recovery time, SNRT/SCL SNRT/sinus cycle length, AV interval atrioventricular interval, ARP atrial refractory period, VRP ventricular refractory period wild type and mutant mice. Three different modes of physical stress testing (two treadmill protocols and swimming) provoked similar maximal heart rates in both genotypes that were comparable to what has been published before [32]. In addition, sinus node recovery time tested by electrical stimulation was not altered in Panx1 -/-mice.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 68%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…SNRT sinus node recovery time, SNRTc corrected sinus node recovery time, SNRT/SCL SNRT/sinus cycle length, AV interval atrioventricular interval, ARP atrial refractory period, VRP ventricular refractory period wild type and mutant mice. Three different modes of physical stress testing (two treadmill protocols and swimming) provoked similar maximal heart rates in both genotypes that were comparable to what has been published before [32]. In addition, sinus node recovery time tested by electrical stimulation was not altered in Panx1 -/-mice.…”
Section: Discussionsupporting
confidence: 68%
“…Again, there was no significant difference when comparing the two genotypes (Table 4). All parameters obtained in the two genotypes were in accordance with what has been reported in mice previously [32]. Finally, repeated atrial and ventricular burst stimulation with different cycle lengths before and after injection of isoprenaline was applied to provoke arrhythmia and test for atrial and ventricular vulnerability.…”
Section: Electrophysiological Studies In Panx1supporting
confidence: 65%
“…The main findings of our Ecc analysis indicate that while the rodent heart has some clear differences compared to the human heart in aspects such as action potential repolarization and calcium handling [22,23,25], its mechanical response to the effect of various pacing modes seems to have important similarities to the large mammalian heart. While previous studies in the mouse heart have already demonstrated negative effects of acute RV pacing on Figure 6.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 91%
“…This interval was shown to be smaller than for humans. However, changes in the QT interval hardly present clinical repercussion in animals, as occurs in humans, such as situations of hypothermia or hypercalcemia [22].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%