Artifacts, assumptions, and ambiguity: Pitfalls in comparing experimental results to numerical simulations when studying electrical stimulation of the heart.

Insidious experimental artifacts and invalid theoretical assumptions complicate the comparison of numerical predictions and observed data. Such difficulties are particularly troublesome when studying electrical stimulation of the heart. During unipolar stimulation of cardiac tissue, the artifacts include nonlinearity of membrane dyes, optical signals blocked by the stimulating electrode, averaging of optical signals with depth, lateral averaging of optical signals, limitations of the current source, and the use of excitation-contraction uncouplers. The assumptions involve electroporation, membrane models, electrode size, the perfusing bath, incorrect model parameters, the applicability of a continuum model, and tissue damage. Comparisons of theory and experiment during far-field stimulation are limited by many of these same factors, plus artifacts from plunge and epicardial recording electrodes and assumptions about the fiber angle at an insulating boundary. These pitfalls must be overcome in order to understand quantitatively how the heart responds to an electrical stimulus. (c) 2002 American Institute of Physics.