B. Thomas Golisano College of Computing and Information Sciences, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, New York, United States of America.
School of Mathematical Sciences, Rochester Institute of Technology, Rochester, New York, United States of America.
PLoS One. 2014 Jan 8;9(1):e84401. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0084401. eCollection 2014.
Numerical integration of mathematical models of heart cell electrophysiology provides an important computational tool for studying cardiac arrhythmias, but the abundance of available models complicates selecting an appropriate model. We study the behavior of two recently published models of human ventricular action potentials, the Grandi-Pasqualini-Bers (GPB) and the O'Hara-Virág-Varró-Rudy (OVVR) models, and compare the results with four previously published models and with available experimental and clinical data. We find the shapes and durations of action potentials and calcium transients differ between the GPB and OVVR models, as do the magnitudes and rate-dependent properties of transmembrane currents and the calcium transient. Differences also occur in the steady-state and S1-S2 action potential duration and conduction velocity restitution curves, including a maximum conduction velocity for the OVVR model roughly half that of the GPB model and well below clinical values. Between single cells and tissue, both models exhibit differences in properties, including maximum upstroke velocity, action potential amplitude, and minimum diastolic interval. Compared to experimental data, action potential durations for the GPB and OVVR models agree fairly well (although OVVR epicardial action potentials are shorter), but maximum slopes of steady-state restitution curves are smaller. Although studies show alternans in normal hearts, it occurs only in the OVVR model, and only for a narrow range of cycle lengths. We find initiated spiral waves do not progress to sustained breakup for either model. The dominant spiral wave period of the GPB model falls within clinically relevant values for ventricular tachycardia (VT), but for the OVVR model, the dominant period is longer than periods associated with VT. Our results should facilitate choosing a model to match properties of interest in human cardiac tissue and to replicate arrhythmia behavior more closely. Furthermore, by indicating areas where existing models disagree, our findings suggest avenues for further experimental work.
对心脏细胞电生理学的数学模型进行数值积分,为研究心脏心律失常提供了一个重要的计算工具,但可用模型的丰富性使得选择合适的模型变得复杂。我们研究了两种最近发表的人类心室动作电位模型,即 Grandi-Pasqualini-Bers(GPB)和 O'Hara-Virág-Varró-Rudy(OVVR)模型,并将结果与之前发表的四种模型以及可用的实验和临床数据进行了比较。我们发现 GPB 和 OVVR 模型之间的动作电位和钙瞬变的形状和持续时间不同,跨膜电流和钙瞬变的幅度和速率依赖性特性也不同。在动作电位时程和传导速度恢复曲线的稳态和 S1-S2 中也存在差异,包括 OVVR 模型的最大传导速度大约是 GPB 模型的一半,远低于临床值。在单细胞和组织之间,两种模型在特性上都存在差异,包括最大上升速度、动作电位幅度和最小舒张间隔。与实验数据相比,GPB 和 OVVR 模型的动作电位时程相当吻合(尽管 OVVR 心外膜动作电位较短),但稳态恢复曲线的最大斜率较小。尽管研究表明正常心脏中存在交替,但仅在 OVVR 模型中发生,而且仅在较窄的周期长度范围内发生。我们发现,对于这两种模型,启动的螺旋波都不会发展为持续的破裂。GPB 模型的主导螺旋波周期落在室性心动过速(VT)的临床相关值内,但对于 OVVR 模型,主导周期比与 VT 相关的周期更长。我们的研究结果应有助于选择与人类心脏组织感兴趣的特性相匹配的模型,并更紧密地复制心律失常行为。此外,通过指出现有模型存在分歧的领域,我们的发现为进一步的实验工作提供了途径。