Action potential recordings. B, mean ?SEM AP duration at 90 of repolarization (APD90 ) under every condition. n = quantity of experiments, P 0.01 and P 0.001.C2013 The CD59 Protein custom synthesis Authors. The Journal of PhysiologyC2013 The Physiological SocietyJ Physiol 591.Weak IK1 , IKs limit human repolarization reserveOther ionic present variations and in silico assessmentThe functional, pharmacological, and biochemical information described above all point to decreased repolarization reserve as a result of smaller sized I Ks and I K1 expression in human hearts as the basis for their bigger APD prolonging response to I Kr inhibition. To assess the potential function of other ionic current differences, we compared various other currents involving canine and human hearts. I to , recorded because the difference between peak and end-pulse current during 300 ms depolarizing pulses from -90 mV (0.33 Hz), was smaller in human versus dog (Fig. 9A). I CaL evoked by 400 ms test pulses from -40 mV was 30 bigger in human (Fig. 9B). Recovery kinetics of I to (Supplemental Fig. 3A) and I Ca (Supplemental Fig. 3B) currents have been not statistically distinctive in myocytes from human anddog ventricle. Ni2+ (ten mmol l-1 )-sensitive NCX current was not drastically different between species (Fig. 9C and D). To assess the contribution of ionic current components to repolarization reserve in human versus canine hearts, we initially Adiponectin/Acrp30 Protein Accession adapted the Hund udy dynamic (HRd) canine ventricular AP model (Hund Rudy, 2004). We then adjusted the present densities in the dog model in line with the experimentally observed differences in humans, to acquire `humanized’ APs (see Supplemental Methods). Supplemental Fig. 4 shows the resulting simulations: APD90 at 1 Hz in the dog model was 209 ms, versus human 264 ms, close to experimentally determined values (APD90 at 1 Hz: dog 227 ms, human 270 ms). I Kr block increased APD90 by 26 within the human AP model (Supplemental Fig. 4A) versus 15.five in the dog model (Supplemental Fig. 4B),Figure 6. Impact of combined I Kr + I K1 and I Kr + I Ks inhibition in human and dog ventricular muscle preparations (endocardial impalements) A, representative APs at baseline (circle), following exposure to ten mol l-1 BaCl2 (triangle), 50 nmol l-1 dofetilide (diamond), and combined 10 mol l-1 BaCl2 + 50 nmol l-1 dofetilide (rectangle) in human (prime traces) and dog (bottom traces) ventricular muscle. Brackets show typical differences involving conditions indicated. B, representative APs at baseline (circle), following exposure to 1 mol l-1 HMR-1566 (triangle), 50 nmol l-1 dofetilide (diamond), and combined 1 mol l-1 HMR-1566 + 50 nmol l-1 dofetilide (rectangle) in human (major traces) and dog (bottom traces) ventricular muscle. Brackets show typical differences in between conditions indicated.C2013 The Authors. The Journal of PhysiologyC2013 The Physiological SocietyN. Jost and othersJ Physiol 591.qualitatively consistent with experimental findings (56 , 22 respectively). I Kr inhibition elevated human APD90 by 71.2 inside the presence of I K1 block, indicating a 173.8 enhance in I Kr blocking impact with all the I K1 contribution to repolarization reserve suppressed (Supplemental Fig. 4A). For the canine model (Supplemental Fig. 4B), I Kr block enhanced APD90 by 45.4 in the presence of I K1 block, indicating a 193.five enhance in I Kr blocking impact when I K1 is decreased. This result is consistent with experimental information suggesting a bigger contribution of I K1 to repolarization reserve in the dog. I Kr block p.
