Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 241

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

Differences between outward currents of human atrial and subepicardial ventricular myocytes.

Open access
Amos, G J, Wettwer, E, Metzger, F, Li, Q, Himmel, H M, Ravens, U·1996·The Journal of Physiology

Abstract

1. Outward currents were studied in myocytes isolated from human atrial and subepicardial ventricular myocardium using the whole‐cell voltage clamp technique at 22 degrees C. The Na+ current was inactivated with prepulses to ‐40 mV and the Ca2+ current was eliminated by both reducing extracellular [Ca2+] to 0.5 mM and addition of 100 microM CdCl2 to the bath solution. 2. In human myocytes, three different outward currents were observed. A slowly inactivating sustained outward current, I(so), was found in atrial but not ventricular myocytes. A rapidly inactivating outward current, I(to), of similar current density was observed in cells from the two tissues. An additional uncharacterized non‐inactivating background current of similar size was observed in atrial and in ventricular myocytes. 3. I(to) and I(so) could be differentiated in atrial myocytes by their different kinetics and potential dependence of inactivation, and their different sensitivities to block by 4‐amino‐pyridine, suggesting that two individual channel types were involved. 4. In atrial cells, inactivation of I(to) was more rapid and steady‐state inactivation occurred at more negative membrane potentials than in ventricular cells. Furthermore, the recovery of I(to) from inactivation was slower and without overshoot in atrial myocytes. In addition, 4‐aminopyridine‐induced block of I(to) was more efficient in atrial than in ventricular cells. These observations suggest that the channels responsible for atrial and ventricular I(to) were not identical. 5. We conclude that the differences in outward currents substantially contribute to the particular shapes of human atrial and ventricular action potentials. The existence of I(so) in atrial cells only provides a clinically interesting target for anti‐arrhythmic drug action, since blockers of I(so) would selectively prolong the atrial refractory period, leaving ventricular refractoriness unaltered.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1113/jphysiol.1996.sp021194

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 241

Metadata

Authors
Amos, G. J., Wettwer, E., Metzger, F., Li, Q., Himmel, H. M., & Ravens, U.
Venue
The Journal of Physiology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
1996-02-15
Volume
491
Issue
1
Pages
31-50
ISSN
  • 0022-3751 (ISSN-L)
  • 1469-7793
OpenAlex
W2020598747
Cited by
241
References
0
FWCI
3.34
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
green

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Differences between outward currents of human atrial and subepicardial ventricular myocytes. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1113/jphysiol.1996.sp021194
The paper
Amos, G. J., Wettwer, E., Metzger, F., Li, Q., Himmel, H. M., & Ravens, U. (1996). Differences between outward currents of human atrial and subepicardial ventricular myocytes. The Journal of Physiology. https://doi.org/10.1113/jphysiol.1996.sp021194

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.