Skip to main content
PLOS One logoLink to PLOS One
. 2022 Mar 31;17(3):e0259174. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0259174

Open-source low-cost cardiac optical mapping system

Dmitry Rybashlykov 1, Jaclyn Brennan 2, Zexu Lin 2, Igor R Efimov 2,*, Roman Syunyaev 1,3,*
Editor: Alexander V Panfilov4
PMCID: PMC8970595  PMID: 35358183

Abstract

Fluorescent imaging with voltage- or calcium-sensitive dyes, known as optical mapping, is one of the indispensable modern techniques to study cardiac or neural electrophysiology, unsurpassed by temporal and spatial resolution. High-speed CMOS cameras capable of optical registration of action potential propagation are in general very costly. We present a complete solution priced below US$1,000 (including camera and lens) at the moment of publication with an open-source image acquisition and processing software. We demonstrate that the iDS UI-3130CP rev.2 camera we used in this study is capable of 200x200 977 frames per second (FPS) action potential recordings from rodent hearts, with the signal-to-noise-ratio of a conditioned signal of 16 ± 10. A comparison with a specialized MiCAM Ultimate-L camera has shown that signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) while lower is sufficient for accurate measurements of AP waveform, conduction velocity (± 0.04 m/s) and action potential duration (± 7ms) in mouse and rat hearts. We used 4-aminopyridine to prolong the action potential duration in mouse heart, thus demonstrating that the proposed system is adequate for pharmacological studies.

Introduction

An optical technique of measurements of cellular transmembrane voltage via potentiometric dyes was introduced in the 1970s, known today as optical mapping [14]. Potentiometric dye molecules bind to cell membranes and undergo either molecular motion or an electronic redistribution upon excitation and emission [5]. The changes of the external electrical field affect transition energy, corresponding emission spectrum can be detected and recorded. Further advances in the field include calcium-sensitive dyes (changing emission spectrum upon binding with calcium ions) [6], metabolic imaging (via intrinsic NADH and/or FAD fluorescence) [7], simultaneous mapping of voltage and calcium [8,9], simultaneous imaging from the several sides of the heart (panoramic mapping) [10,11], and transmural imaging via long wavelength dyes [12].

One notable advantage of optical mapping in comparison to traditional multielectrode arrays is high spatial and temporal resolution that makes it possible to accurately track the rapidly propagating excitation wavefronts in ventricular and atrial arrhythmias [13]. However high spatio-temporal resolution requires highly specialized cameras: 100x100 pixels, 1,000 frames per second (FPS) and digital image acquisition hardware. It typically has a high price of US$50,000–100,000. This price is prohibitively high for education and some research applications, for example, several cameras are required for multiparametric and panoramic optical mapping. Recently, high speed USB 3.0 machine vision-specialized industrial CMOS cameras entered the mass market eliminating the need for specialized data-acquisition systems and, thus, reducing the price of a fast imaging system. Previously, Lee et al. [14] have demonstrated that it is possible to optically map pig and rabbit hearts with relatively inexpensive ($600–1200) CMOS cameras, as it was possible with inexpensive CCD cameras [15]. In particular, Lee et al. have shown that action potential (AP) recordings up to 1,000 Hz and SNR of up to ~50 (defined as (AP Amplitude)/(SD during diastolic intervals)) are possible in large animal hearts with USB3.0 iDS (Imaging Development Systems, GmbH) cameras. Unfortunately, this method was not applied to rodent models, which are much more popular models compared to pigs and rabbits, and not made available to the wider research community.

In our open-source research and development presented here we used iDS UI-3130CP-M-GL (~$700US including lens) and iDS Software Suite programming interface that makes it possible to customize image acquisition (Fig 1). Here, we demonstrate capabilities of action potential recordings in the two most popular laboratory animal models in cardiovascular research: rat and mouse hearts. Small rodent hearts are more challenging for optical recordings as compared to large animal hearts due to much lower optical signal intensity. We compared this inexpensive solution to the state-of-the-art MiCAM ULTIMA-L system, which has superior SNR (Fig 2), but at a much higher price approaching $100,000. New inexpensive optical mapping system provides sufficient quality data to track activation and repolarization sequences and action potential duration (APD).

Fig 1. The experimental setup for the iDS camera.

Fig 1

(A) iDS UI-3130CP M.GL camera (977Hz sampling frequency). (B) Pentax C60607KP lens. (C) 650nm long-pass filter. (D) Green excitation LED (530nm wavelength). (E) Perfusion chamber with heart. (F) iDS Recorder application. (G) Open source RHYTHM1.2 software, based on Matlab and C++.

Fig 2. Histogram of SNR in recordings from mouse ventricles (n = 6).

Fig 2

Orange represents SNR of the raw signal obtained by iDS, green represents SNR from the same pixels after signal conditioning, blue represents corresponding SNR of the raw signal obtained by MiCAM.

Materials and methods

iDS UI-3130CP camera and software

In this study we used a UI-3130CP camera from Imaging Development Systems, which is capable of 10-bit recordings at resolutions up to 800 by 600 pixels. The “uEye cockpit” image acquisition software provided by iDS has neither an option to save recordings in lossless format, nor an option to make 10-bit recordings. Therefore, we have developed a custom open-source image acquisition application using the C++ API provided by iDS (https://github.com/humanphysiologylab/ueyemappingWin).

The custom software was designed to make recordings with a resolution of 200x200 pixels and a framerate of 977 frames per second (FPS). The high frequency recordings were possible because of the reduction of the active part of the sensor to the smaller area in the center. Although the framerate up to 1400 FPS is possible at 120x120 pixels resolution, this resulted in a narrow (5.5 degrees) field of view. Since direct capture to solid-state drive resulted in frame loss and uneven FPS, software was designed to capture the recording directly to the RAM and to transfer it to the storage after the recording has finished. This approach requires RAM size large enough to store the whole recording. For example, a 5 second recording at 200x200 resolution at 977 FPS requires 375 MB of memory. Considering this data memory requirement, at least 2 GB of RAM is recommended. The software interface allows users to visualize signal intensity and change the recording gain and frame rate before the image acquisition (S1 Fig), which is essential to adjust LED intensity when signal intensity is too low or saturated. The file format of the data is covered in the software user manual. Binary iDS camera recordings are compatible with popular open-source RHYTHM signal processing and analysis software [9], which we update regularly.

Optical mapping protocol

All experimental animal protocols were approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee at The George Washington University and conform to the NIH Guide for the Care and Usage of Laboratory animals.

We followed the protocol described earlier [16]. Briefly, animals were anesthetized via isoflurane vapors, after ensuring thoracotomy heart was excised and quickly cannulated. Hearts were Langendorff-perfused with Tyrode’s solution (in mM: 128.2 NaCl, 4.7 KCl, 1.05 MgCl2, 1.3 CaCl2, 1.19 NaH2PO4, 20 NaHCO3, 11.1 Glucose), electromechanically uncoupled with 5–10 μM blebbistatin and stained with voltage-sensitive dye Di-4-ANEPPS. Left ventricle was paced at 80–150 ms pacing cycle length (PCL), PCL of 150 ms was fast enough to suppress sinus rhythm in all experiments. The dye was excited with 520 nm LED (Prizmatix UHP-Mic-LED-520), and fluorescent emission was captured through a long-pass filter (650nm) (Fig 1). Resulting optical signal was recorded sequentially by either the iDS camera or the MiCAM from the same camera position: after recording several sequences at varying pacing cycle lengths (PCL), it was removed, and the iDS camera was installed in its place (Fig 1).

Pharmacological protocol

We used a transient outward current (Ito) blocker 4-Aminopyridine (4-AP) [1724] (Millipore Sigma, Cat. 278575). 250 mM 4-AP stock solution was prepared with pH adjusted to 7.4 using 1 M hydrochloric acid (Fisher Scientific, SA48-1). Small quantities of the 4-AP stock solution were added to the modified Tyrode’s perfusion solution and perfused for 10 min to reach a final working concentration of 5.6 mM.

Data conditioning and analysis

Signal conditioning included ensemble averaging both in space (gaussian filter with window of 3 by 3 pixels for MiCAM and 5 by 5 pixels for iDS) and in time (all beats were averaged in a 2 s recording). The signals after all intermediate steps of signal conditioning for both cameras are shown in the S2 Fig. Raw iDS-recorded signal was, in general, noisier as compared to signals from MiCAM camera. While spatial filtering reduced the SNR to a level adequate to measure upstroke for activation sequence and conduction velocity (CV) analysis, both spatial and temporal averaging were required to measure APD. Therefore, only the former step of signal conditioning was used for the activation sequence and conduction velocity (CV) measurements. Conduction velocity was calculated using RHYTHM 1.2 [9]. with the algorithm earlier described by Bayly et al [25]. Signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) was calculated as the ratio of the root mean square amplitude to the root mean square noise, where the amplitude of noise is evaluated at resting potential.

APD was measured at 80% repolarization (APD80). The noise amplitude affected apparent resting potential in the recordings, hampering the comparison of APD80 measured by two cameras. Therefore, prior to APD calculation, resting potential level for each pixel was determined by gaussian filter (σ = 7ms, truncated at 4*σ). Noisy and oversaturated areas were excluded semi-automatically by choosing appropriate SNR and signal intensity cutoff levels. APD outlier boundaries were calculated as Q1 - 1.5*IQR and Q3 + 1.5*IQR, where Q1 and Q3 denote first and third quartile respectively and IQR = Q3 - Q1 (interquartile range). Any value exceeding those boundaries was considered an outlier and was excluded from statistical analysis.

Signal processing and analysis were done with Rhythm 1.2 software [9], while APD and SNR comparison between two cameras were done as described above with custom python scripts.

Results

The capabilities and limitations of the iDS camera system were tested in comparison with the more expensive state-of-the-art MiCAM Ultimate-L system on Langendorff-perfused mouse and rat hearts. We used the traditional optical mapping setup [16] shown on Fig 1 (see “Materials and Methods” for details on signal acquisition and processing). Raw iDS signal recordings were, in general, quite noisy: SNR was 0.5 ± 0.4 for mouse hearts (Fig 2; here and below standard errors are reported). Signal processing (binning and ensemble averaging, see Methods for details) increased SNR to 16 ± 10 for the mouse heart (Fig 2, processed signal SNR and signal intensity maps are shown in S3 Fig). The comparison of representative iDS and MiCAM optical mapping systems recordings are shown in 3C–3H and Fig 4C–4H. The processed signal clearly reproduces both depolarization phase and general AP waveform.

Fig 3. Conditioned signals in recordings of a mouse heart.

Fig 3

(A),(B) Still frames with color-coded pixels corresponding to the AP waveforms. (C),(E),(G) Signals obtained from iDS camera. (D),(F),(H) Signals obtained from the MiCAM camera.

Fig 4. Conditioned signals in optical recordings of a rat heart.

Fig 4

(A),(B) Still frames with color-coded pixels corresponding to the AP waveforms. (C),(E),(G) Signals obtained from iDS camera. (D),(F),(H) Signals obtained from the MiCAM camera.

In order to verify the accuracy of the conditioned signal waveform we have compared the mouse APD measured by the two cameras in control (n = 6) and during administration of Ito blocker 4-aminopyridine (5.6 mM, n = 6). The comparison at 150 ms PCL is summarized in Fig 5. APD80 measurements in left ventricle by two cameras differed by 7 ± 12 ms in control and 5 ± 5 ms in 4-AP; in right ventricle: 5 ± 9 ms in control, 6 ± 5 ms in 4-AP. The difference is partially due to the fact that recordings were not simultaneous and the field of view was slightly different. However, we found no statistically significant differences between APD measured by the cameras neither in left nor in right ventricle (Fig 5). It was possible to measure drug effect by the cheaper system: the iDS camera system registered 19 ± 6 ms and 20 ± 6 ms action potential prolongation by 4-AP in left ventricles (p = 0.0035, paired t-test, Fig 5A) and right ventricles (p = 0.0035, paired t-test, Fig 5B), respectively, which corresponds to low concentration 4-AP measurements in isolated cell experiments [17].

Fig 5. Comparison of APD measured by iDS and MiCAM.

Fig 5

(A) Comparison of APD in left ventricle. (B) Comparison of APD in right ventricle. Comparison was made for a range of hearts (n = 6) at PCL = 150ms in control and in presence of 5.6mM 4AP. Statistically significant differences are marked by an asterisk (paired t-test).

The APD restitution is depicted in Fig 6A. We did observe the reduction of APD with decreasing PCL with both cameras: over a change of PCL from 150 ms to 80 ms mean APD has decreased by 19 ms and 18 ms in left and right ventricles respectively according to iDS and by 24 ms in both ventricles according to MiCAM, corresponding to relatively shallow slope of the restitution of the mouse heart [26,27].

Fig 6. APD and CV restitution curves.

Fig 6

(A,B) APD80 restitution in control and in presence of 5.6 mM 4AP in left ventricle. (C) Longitudinal/transversal CV restitution measured by iDS and MiCAM cameras.

Figs 7 and 8 show comparisons of activation maps (A, C) and APD maps (B, D) measured in mouse and rat hearts by iDS and MiCAM. Since the depolarization phase is less prone to noise, activation sequence and, consequently, CV could be determined more accurately than APD with the iDS camera. Root mean square deviation (RMSD) between measurements by two cameras was 4 cm/s for longitudinal CV and 2 cm/s for transversal CV (Fig 6B). The CV restitution measurements with iDS camera were consistent with previous studies [28,29] with a slight reduction in CV when pacing frequency was increased (or PCL reduced). For example, at PCL = 150 ms longitudinal CV was 51 ± 4 cm/s, transversal CV was 29 ± 3 cm/s; while at PCL = 90 ms longitudinal CV was 47 ± 3 cm/s, transversal CV was 25 ± 3 cm/s, which is close to previously published measurements [28,29].

Fig 7. Comparison of activation maps and APD maps recorded by iDS and MiCAM.

Fig 7

(A) Mouse heart activation sequence measured by iDS camera. (B) Mouse heart APD map measured by iDS camera. (C) Activation sequence measured by MiCAM camera. (D) APD map measured by MiCAM camera. Black line marks the region that was used for APD analysis, the region was divided into left and right ventricle as shown by red dashed line. Pacing electrode location is marked by the lightning symbol, black and orange arrows mark the directions for longitudinal and transversal conduction velocities, correspondingly.

Fig 8. Comparison of activation maps and APD maps captured by iDS and MiCAM.

Fig 8

(A) Rat heart activation sequence measured by iDS camera. (B) Rat heart APD map measured by iDS camera. (C) Activation sequence measured by MiCAM camera. (D) APD map measured by MiCAM camera. Pacing electrode location is marked by the lightning symbol.

It should also be noted that one of the rat hearts (Fig 8A and 8B) was paced from the atrioventricular groove. We can see simultaneous AP propagation in the atria and ventricles from the pacing electrode, which demonstrates that both atrial and ventricular activation sequence can be accurately recorded with a cheaper optical mapping system. The iDS system was also capable of recording atrial AP waveform as seen in Figs 3C and 8B, however because of uneven illumination by excitation LED the recording from right atrium was noisy.

Discussion

We have implemented a low-cost open-source optical mapping system, capable of 977 FPS 200x200 pixel imaging. The total system price, as shown in S1 Table, is below US$5,000 including the light source, at the time of publication, while the gold standard Micam Ultima-L system used in this study for comparison is priced at or above US$100,000. It should be noted that the main goal of the study was to test the iDS camera capabilities and limitations. Therefore, we kept all components apart from camera and optics equal in both optical mapping system setups. As a consequence, the LED we used for die excitation was the most expensive part of the optical mapping system, while the camera and lens themselves were priced below US$1,000.

In our study we have shown that iDS system recordings are of sufficient quality for AP waveform (Figs 3 and 4), activation sequence (Figs 7A and 8A) and CV (Fig 6B) measurements, at 1/20 price. Low signal amplitude resulted in SNR of raw recordings of 0.5±0.4 for the mouse heart and 1.4 ± 0.3 for the rat heart. After signal conditioning, including binning and ensemble averaging, SNR significantly improved to 16±10 for mouse heart and 9±2 for rat heart making it close to MiCAM recordings (Fig 2). As noted above, depolarization phase is less prone to noise then relatively slow repolarization. Consequently, activation sequence and CV measurements by iDS system were robust: RMSD between corresponding recordings by two cameras was equal to 4 cm/s even though ensemble averaging over 2 second recording was not used for these measurements. On the other hand the difference between APD measurements was more pronounced. For example, iDS measurements at 150 ms PCL w/o drug were on average 6 ms longer than MiCAM measurements (Fig 6A). This difference is, in part, due to the distortion of the depolarisation phase and resting potential level by noise. The latter affects the 80% repolarization level hampering the comparison between cameras with different SNR. However, in the worst-case scenario, the difference between APD measurements was 25 ms despite the fact that SNR was high in the iDS recording (SNR equals 25 for this heart, while the average SNR was 16, representative SNR maps for all recordings can be found in S3 Fig). We conclude that largest deviations between the recordings are actually caused by the fact that recordings were not simultaneous, and the field of view was different for the two cameras. This is also consistent with the fact that unpaired comparison between two cameras resulted in high p-values (unpaired t-test, p = 0.42 in control, p = 0.52 in 4-AP, compare to paired t-test in Fig 5). Despite this difference between the recordings, we have demonstrated that the iDS system is feasible for drug effect measurements. In particular, we have shown significant prolongation of APD by the transient outward current blocker 4-AP (Fig 5, 18±6 ms, n = 5, p = 0.0035, paired t-test). Similar APD prolongation at low drug concentrations was reported previously in isolated mouse ventricular cells [17] and small tissue atrial preparations [30].

Previously Lee et al. had already demonstrated iDS low-cost cameras for panoramic optical mapping [14], using UI-3360CP camera at 1,000 FPS, 160x220 pixels, yielding SNR of about 35 for pig hearts and SNR of about 10 for rabbit hearts at 400 FPS, but the software used in the study was not openly available and the method was not widely disseminated in cardiovascular research community. During the preparation of this publication, Lee et al. published a report of a complete and low-cost optical mapping system, which includes a Langendorff perfusion system complete with pumps and a thermostat with custom controllers, as well as an LED system and an open-source code for low-cost iDS camera [31]. However, this competing solution is not readily compatible with currently available GUI-based signal conditioning and analysis software [9,3234] and it lacks a graphical user interface suggesting the use of separate uEye cockpit application to refocus the camera, adjust the LED intensity and camera gain. The authors presented recordings at 500 FPS, which is often not enough for rodent hearts, in which the entire heart activation takes about 10 ms (Figs 7 and 8). The validation of the system in the study was conducted on large mammals, pig and rabbit hearts, while lacking direct comparison to established optical mapping systems. It remains to be shown that their method is applicable to more popular rodent heart models.

In our work, we focused on the development of optical mapping solution that can be used by biomedical researchers and educators lacking programming or electrical engineering skills. We present a custom open-source software that provides a graphical user interface, convenient interactive camera settings and a real-time viewfinder feed (S1 Fig) and is compatible with established open source Rhythm analysis software that was used through the past decade by many research laboratories [9,32]. The solution including camera and custom open-source software was proven to produce accurate recordings by direct comparison to a specialized optical mapping system. Moreover, our study demonstrates that AP measurements on mouse and rat ventricles (thickness 1.5 and 1.9 mm) and atria are possible, while the previous studies focused on much larger mammals: pig (thickness 20 mm) and rabbit ventricles (thickness 5 mm) [3538]. While larger hearts yield higher signal intensity, we have demonstrated that at 977 FPS, 200x200 pixels the iDS solution is sufficient not only for AP waveform recordings in small rodent hearts, but also for accurate measurements of both longitudinal and transversal CV in the mouse heart. The high flexibility of software also allows for long recordings. We have tested up to five minutes recordings. It may prove to be essential for the measurement of slower NADH changes during ischemia/reperfusion studies [7,39]. Signal acquisition and processing software used in this study are open-source and distributed under MIT license (the links are provided in the Supporting Information, S1 Text).

We summarize the advantages and limitations of the proposed optical system as follows. (1) The price is more than 20 times cheaper than a specialized camera, making the system suitable for educational purposes or for the applications requiring the use of several cameras such as panoramic and multi-parametric mapping. (2) We have shown that despite the relatively low SNR, AP waveform, activation sequence and CV could be accurately measured after the signal processing via compatible open-source Rhythm software. It should be noted, that while only spatial binning was used for the activation sequence and CV, precise measurement of the AP waveform required temporal averaging over 2 second recordings. This requires that the AP waveform is limited to regular periodic heart rhythm while, for example, the recording of alternans is not always feasible. Moreover, arrythmia usually results in complex propagation patterns reducing overall SNR of the recording, which is likely to obstruct activation sequence recording as well. (3) As an example of practical application we have demonstrated in this study that drug effects on AP waveform can be measured by the optical-mapping system. However, as exemplified by atrial recordings in Fig 4C, thin myocardium tissue reduces the quality of the signal, which might hinder the use of the cheaper system in experiments involving the mapping of the monolayer cell cultures.

Another limitation is a requirement of a wide-angle lens. UI-3130CP has a 1/3.6” (or 7.1 x 7.1 mm) sensor, while the effective size was reduced to 1x1mm in order to increase the camera frame rate. Therefore, the lens used in the study (Pentax 6mm TV lens) provided only a 9.2 degrees field of view, which is optimal for the hearts of small rodents such as rats and mice, but a different lens or a tandem optical system should be designed for larger mammals. The use of a more advanced optics could also improve overall signal quality.

Supporting information

S1 Fig. Interactive image acquisition software.

Screenshots of image acquisition software. Real-time viewfinder feed allows the user to adjust settings when signal amplitude is too low (B,C) or oversaturating (D).

(TIF)

S2 Fig. Signal conditioning.

Samples of the signal from a single pixel after different steps of conditioning.

(TIF)

S3 Fig. SNR and intensity maps.

SNR maps and intensity maps for conditioned recordings of 6 mouse hearts recorded with iDS camera at PCL = 150 ms.

(TIF)

S1 Table. Component prices in the MiCAM Ultimate-L system and the system presented in this study.

(DOCX)

S1 Text. Software links and supporting figures.

(PDF)

Data Availability

All optical mapping recordings files is available from the zenodo database DOI:10.5281/zenodo.5557829

Funding Statement

The research was supported by Russian Foundation for Basic Research (https://www.rfbr.ru/rffi/eng) grant 19-29-04111 (to RS) and Leducq Foundation (https://www.fondationleducq.org/) project RHYTHM (to IE). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

References

  • 1.Boukens BJ, Efimov IR. A century of optocardiography. IEEE Rev Biomed Eng. 2014;7: 115–125. doi: 10.1109/RBME.2013.2286296 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 2.Cohen LB, Salzberg BM. Optical measurement of membrane potential. Reviews of Physiology, Biochemistry and Pharmacology. 1978. pp. 35–88. doi: 10.1007/3-540-08907-1_2 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 3.Salzberg BM, Davila HV, Cohen LB. Optical recording of impulses in individual neurones of an invertebrate central nervous system. Nature. 1973;246: 508–509. doi: 10.1038/246508a0 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 4.Salama G, Morad M. Merocyanine 540 as an optical probe of transmembrane electrical activity in the heart. Science. 1976;191: 485–487. doi: 10.1126/science.191.4226.485 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 5.Loew LM. Design and characterization of electrochromic membrane probes. J Biochem Biophys Methods. 1982;6: 243–260. doi: 10.1016/0165-022x(82)90047-1 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 6.Takahashi A, Camacho P, Lechleiter JD, Herman B. Measurement of intracellular calcium. Physiol Rev. 1999;79: 1089–1125. doi: 10.1152/physrev.1999.79.4.1089 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 7.Salama G, Lombardi R, Elson J. Maps of optical action potentials and NADH fluorescence in intact working hearts. Am J Physiol. 1987;252: H384–94. doi: 10.1152/ajpheart.1987.252.2.H384 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 8.Efimov IR, Huang DT, Rendt JM, Salama G. Optical mapping of repolarization and refractoriness from intact hearts. Circulation. 1994. pp. 1469–1480. doi: 10.1161/01.cir.90.3.1469 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 9.Cathey B, Obaid S, Zolotarev AM, Pryamonosov RA, Syunyaev RA, George SA, et al. Open-Source Multiparametric Optocardiography. Sci Rep. 2019;9: 721. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-36809-y [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 10.Lin SF, Wikswo JP. Panoramic optical imaging of electrical propagation in isolated heart. J Biomed Opt. 1999;4: 200–207. doi: 10.1117/1.429910 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 11.Gloschat C, Aras K, Gupta S, Faye NR, Zhang H, Syunyaev RA, et al. RHYTHM: An Open Source Imaging Toolkit for Cardiac Panoramic Optical Mapping. Sci Rep. 2018;8: 2921. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-21333-w [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 12.Bernus O, Mukund KS, Pertsov AM. Detection of intramyocardial scroll waves using absorptive transillumination imaging. J Biomed Opt. 2007;12: 014035. doi: 10.1117/1.2709661 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 13.Ripplinger CM. Panoramic Optical Imaging of Cardiac Arrhythmias. Cardiac Mapping. 2012. pp. 90–97. doi: 10.1002/9781118481585.ch10 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 14.Lee P, Calvo CJ, Alfonso-Almazán JM, Quintanilla JG, Chorro FJ, Yan P, et al. Low-Cost Optical Mapping Systems for Panoramic Imaging of Complex Arrhythmias and Drug-Action in Translational Heart Models. Sci Rep. 2017;7: 43217. doi: 10.1038/srep43217 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 15.Witkowski FX, Leon LJ, Penkoske PA, Giles WR, Spano ML, Ditto WL, et al. Spatiotemporal evolution of ventricular fibrillation. Nature. 1998;392: 78–82. doi: 10.1038/32170 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 16.Lang D, Sulkin M, Lou Q, Efimov IR. Optical mapping of action potentials and calcium transients in the mouse heart. J Vis Exp. 2011. doi: 10.3791/3275 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 17.Fiset C, Clark RB, Larsen TS, Giles WR. A rapidly activating sustained K+ current modulates repolarization and excitation-contraction coupling in adult mouse ventricle. J Physiol. 1997;504 (Pt 3): 557–563. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7793.1997.557bd.x [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 18.Li GR, Feng J, Wang Z, Fermini B, Nattel S. Comparative mechanisms of 4-aminopyridine-resistant Ito in human and rabbit atrial myocytes. Am J Physiol. 1995;269: H463–72. doi: 10.1152/ajpheart.1995.269.2.H463 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 19.Näbauer M, Beuckelmann DJ, Erdmann E. Characteristics of transient outward current in human ventricular myocytes from patients with terminal heart failure. Circ Res. 1993;73: 386–394. doi: 10.1161/01.res.73.2.386 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 20.Wegener JW, Peiter A, Sampson SR, Nawrath H. Mechanism of block by 4-aminopyridine of the transient outward current in rat ventricular cardiomyocytes. J Cardiovasc Pharmacol. 1998;32: 134–138. doi: 10.1097/00005344-199807000-00021 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 21.Castle NA, Slawsky MT. Characterization of 4-aminopyridine block of the transient outward K+ current in adult rat ventricular myocytes. J Pharmacol Exp Ther. 1993;265: 1450–1459. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 22.Simurda J, Simurdová M, Christé G. Use-dependent effects of 4-aminopyridine on transient outward current in dog ventricular muscle. Pflugers Arch. 1989;415: 244–246. doi: 10.1007/BF00370600 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 23.Kostadinova I, Danchev N. 4-aminopyridine–the new old drug for the treatment of neurodegenerative diseases. Pharmacia. 2019. pp. 67–74. doi: 10.3897/pharmacia.66.e35976 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  • 24.Huang CL-H. Murine Electrophysiological Models of Cardiac Arrhythmogenesis. Physiol Rev. 2017;97: 283–409. doi: 10.1152/physrev.00007.2016 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 25.Bayly PV, KenKnight BH, Rogers JM, Hillsley RE, Ideker RE, Smith WM. Estimation of conduction velocity vector fields from epicardial mapping data. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 1998;45: 563–571. doi: 10.1109/10.668746 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 26.Knollmann BC, Schober T, Petersen AO, Sirenko SG, Franz MR. Action potential characterization in intact mouse heart: steady-state cycle length dependence and electrical restitution. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 2007;292: H614–21. doi: 10.1152/ajpheart.01085.2005 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 27.Knollmann BC, Katchman AN, Franz MR. Monophasic action potential recordings from intact mouse heart: validation, regional heterogeneity, and relation to refractoriness. J Cardiovasc Electrophysiol. 2001;12: 1286–1294. doi: 10.1046/j.1540-8167.2001.01286.x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 28.Stein M, van Veen TAB, Hauer RNW, de Bakker JMT, van Rijen HVM. A 50% Reduction of Excitability but Not of Intercellular Coupling Affects Conduction Velocity Restitution and Activation Delay in the Mouse Heart. PLoS ONE. 2011. p. e20310. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0020310 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 29.Eloff BC, Lerner DL, Yamada KA, Schuessler RB, Saffitz JE, Rosenbaum DS. High resolution optical mapping reveals conduction slowing in connexin43 deficient mice. Cardiovasc Res. 2001;51: 681–690. doi: 10.1016/s0008-6363(01)00341-8 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 30.Golovko V, Gonotkov M, Lebedeva E. Effects of 4-aminopyridine on action potentials generation in mouse sinoauricular node strips. Physiological Reports. 2015. p. e12447. doi: 10.14814/phy2.12447 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 31.Marina-Breysse M, García-Escolano A, Vila-García J, Reale-Nosei G, Alfonso-Almazán JM, Yan P, et al. A Complete and Low-Cost Cardiac Optical Mapping System in Translational Animal Models. Front Physiol. 2021;12: 696270. doi: 10.3389/fphys.2021.696270 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 32.Laughner JI, Ng FS, Sulkin MS, Arthur RM, Efimov IR. Processing and analysis of cardiac optical mapping data obtained with potentiometric dyes. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 2012;303: H753–65. doi: 10.1152/ajpheart.00404.2012 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 33.O’Shea C, Holmes AP, Yu TY, Winter J, Wells SP, Correia J, et al. ElectroMap: High-throughput open-source software for analysis and mapping of cardiac electrophysiology. Sci Rep. 2019;9: 1389. doi: 10.1038/s41598-018-38263-2 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 34.Li X, Roney CH, Handa BS, Chowdhury RA, Niederer SA, Peters NS, et al. Standardised Framework for Quantitative Analysis of Fibrillation Dynamics. Sci Rep. 2019;9: 16671. doi: 10.1038/s41598-019-52976-y [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 35.Forman DE, Cittadini A, Azhar G, Douglas PS, Wei JY. Cardiac morphology and function in senescent rats: gender-related differences. J Am Coll Cardiol. 1997;30: 1872–1877. doi: 10.1016/s0735-1097(97)00411-7 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 36.Vetter FJ, McCulloch AD. Three-dimensional analysis of regional cardiac function: a model of rabbit ventricular anatomy. Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology. 1998. pp. 157–183. doi: 10.1016/s0079-6107(98)00006-6 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 37.Huang SY, Tsou HL, Chiu YT, Wu JJ, Lin JH, Yang PC, et al. Statistical method for characterization of hypertrophic cardiomyopathy by use of morphologic and pathologic measurements in pigs (Sus scrofa domestica). Lab Anim Sci. 1999;49: 276–282. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 38.Doevendans P. Cardiovascular phenotyping in mice. Cardiovascular Research. 1998. pp. 34–49. doi: 10.1016/s0008-6363(98)00073-x [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  • 39.Mercader M, Swift L, Sood S, Asfour H, Kay M, Sarvazyan N. Use of endogenous NADH fluorescence for real-time in situ visualization of epicardial radiofrequency ablation lesions and gaps. Am J Physiol Heart Circ Physiol. 2012;302: H2131–8. doi: 10.1152/ajpheart.01141.2011 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Decision Letter 0

Alexander V Panfilov

9 Nov 2021

PONE-D-21-32419Open-Source Low-Cost Cardiac Optical Mapping SystemPLOS ONE

Dear Dr. Syunyaev,

Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit but does not fully meet PLOS ONE’s publication criteria as it currently stands. Therefore, we invite you to submit a revised version of the manuscript that addresses the points raised during the review process.

Please submit your revised manuscript by Dec 24 2021 11:59PM. If you will need more time than this to complete your revisions, please reply to this message or contact the journal office at plosone@plos.org. When you're ready to submit your revision, log on to https://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/ and select the 'Submissions Needing Revision' folder to locate your manuscript file.

Please include the following items when submitting your revised manuscript:

  • A rebuttal letter that responds to each point raised by the academic editor and reviewer(s). You should upload this letter as a separate file labeled 'Response to Reviewers'.

  • A marked-up copy of your manuscript that highlights changes made to the original version. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Revised Manuscript with Track Changes'.

  • An unmarked version of your revised paper without tracked changes. You should upload this as a separate file labeled 'Manuscript'.

If you would like to make changes to your financial disclosure, please include your updated statement in your cover letter. Guidelines for resubmitting your figure files are available below the reviewer comments at the end of this letter.

If applicable, we recommend that you deposit your laboratory protocols in protocols.io to enhance the reproducibility of your results. Protocols.io assigns your protocol its own identifier (DOI) so that it can be cited independently in the future. For instructions see: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submission-guidelines#loc-laboratory-protocols. Additionally, PLOS ONE offers an option for publishing peer-reviewed Lab Protocol articles, which describe protocols hosted on protocols.io. Read more information on sharing protocols at https://plos.org/protocols?utm_medium=editorial-email&utm_source=authorletters&utm_campaign=protocols.

We look forward to receiving your revised manuscript.

Kind regards,

Alexander V Panfilov, PhD

Academic Editor

PLOS ONE

Journal Requirements:

When submitting your revision, we need you to address these additional requirements.

1. Please ensure that your manuscript meets PLOS ONE's style requirements, including those for file naming. The PLOS ONE style templates can be found at 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=wjVg/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_main_body.pdf and 

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/file?id=ba62/PLOSOne_formatting_sample_title_authors_affiliations.pdf

2. Thank you for stating the following in your Competing Interests section:  

"NO authors have competing interests."

Please complete your Competing Interests on the online submission form to state any Competing Interests. If you have no competing interests, please state "The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.", as detailed online in our guide for authors at http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/submit-now 

 This information should be included in your cover letter; we will change the online submission form on your behalf.

3. We note that you have stated that you will provide repository information for your data at acceptance. Should your manuscript be accepted for publication, we will hold it until you provide the relevant accession numbers or DOIs necessary to access your data. If you wish to make changes to your Data Availability statement, please describe these changes in your cover letter and we will update your Data Availability statement to reflect the information you provide.

Additional Editor Comments:

Please respond in full to the comments of the referee and please pay special attention to the comments on clarification of the method, such as re separate figure with all the steps of signal conditioning, for both cameras, including raw signal from one pixel, signals after gaussian filtering and after time averaging. Please also comment if you consider a two-second time averaging as a significant limitation which does not allow mapping of cardiac arrhythmias or unstable spontaneous rhythm where cycle length changes in a beat-to-beat manner. If so, please discuss what should be done in such cases and how it can be addressed/improved.

[Note: HTML markup is below. Please do not edit.]

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

2. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

3. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

4. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

5. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: The study by Rybashlykov et al. presents a novel, complete low-cost solution for an optical mapping system. The authors tested an iDS UI-3130CP-M-GL camera-based system and showed that for the most of electrophysiological parameters, including AP duration and restitution, CV and CV anisotropy, as well as pharmacological testing, the system provides reasonable outcomes that are comparable with a 100-times more expensive MiCAM ULTIMA-L system.

The study is timely and innovative; it presents an important step into the development of reliable low-cost optical mapping systems which are specifically important for pharmacological testing. The manuscript is well-written and the results are well-presented. I just have some minor concerns and suggestions on how to improve data presentation and discussion.

First, it would be highly beneficial for the readers if the authors show in a separate figure all the steps of signal conditioning, for both cameras, including raw signal from one pixel, signals after gaussian filtering and after time averaging.

Two-second time averaging sounds like a significant limitation which does not allow mapping of cardiac arrhythmias or unstable spontaneous rhythm where cycle length changes in a beat-to-beat manner.

Figure S2: It appears that there is a high variability of SNR between 7 mouse hearts shown. Two hearts have a very high SNR but in other three hearts SNR is significantly lower. I was wondering if SNR depends on the quality of staining? Can the authors show the SNR images overlapped with the corresponding fluorescence images (similar to those on Fig. 3A, B and Fig. 4A, B)?

Hearts shown in Figure 3B and Figure 4A seem to be out of focus.

Figure 6: APD difference of 9 ms between the systems sounds too high (about 17% of baseline APD). Was this difference statistically significant? Where were these APDs calculated? Were they averaged throughout the entire mapped area of both ventricles? Would it be more accurate to measure APD separately in the right and the left ventricles? This may decrease the observed difference in APD obtained by different systems.

I assume that APD heterogeneity (dispersion) within the area of interest was relatively high that may also affect the average APD values shown and thus contribute to the observed difference. It would be beneficial to show APD heterogeneity measured within the area of interest for each system.

Figure 7: For both systems, APD looks very heterogeneous within the ventricles. Moreover, there are some regions with outliers: APD of 10 ms (dark blue areas) and more than 100 ms (dark red areas) seems to be not physiological. It would be helpful if the authors exclude these outliers and re-analyzed their data for Figure 5 and 6. It may significantly improve the results.

Finally, the authors may consider including a special section in the discussion that would summarize major pros and contras for the presented system. This section should include the mention that this system might be not applicable for specific studies focused on cardiac arrhythmias (see above).

**********

6. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

[NOTE: If reviewer comments were submitted as an attachment file, they will be attached to this email and accessible via the submission site. Please log into your account, locate the manuscript record, and check for the action link "View Attachments". If this link does not appear, there are no attachment files.]

While revising your submission, please upload your figure files to the Preflight Analysis and Conversion Engine (PACE) digital diagnostic tool, https://pacev2.apexcovantage.com/. PACE helps ensure that figures meet PLOS requirements. To use PACE, you must first register as a user. Registration is free. Then, login and navigate to the UPLOAD tab, where you will find detailed instructions on how to use the tool. If you encounter any issues or have any questions when using PACE, please email PLOS at figures@plos.org. Please note that Supporting Information files do not need this step.

PLoS One. 2022 Mar 31;17(3):e0259174. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0259174.r002

Author response to Decision Letter 0


8 Dec 2021

We thank the editor and the reviewer for their questions. We hope that we were able to address the concerns in the new revision. In particular, we have revised the text and the figures and did and additional experiment in order to improve Figures 4,8 quality. We have also added a separate figure with all the steps of signal conditioning for both cameras. The limitations of a two-second time averaging is also discussed in the new version of the manuscript.

The text below is also attached to the submission as a separate file.

"We thank the reviewer for the positive response to our manuscript. We have carefully considered the suggestions, ran an additional experiment and revised the text and the figures. For the convenience, the reviewer’s questions are colored with cyan font below.

Reviewer #1: The study by Rybashlykov et al. presents a novel, complete low-cost solution for an optical mapping system. The authors tested an iDS UI-3130CP-M-GL camera-based system and showed that for the most of electrophysiological parameters, including AP duration and restitution, CV and CV anisotropy, as well as pharmacological testing, the system provides reasonable outcomes that are comparable with a 100-times more expensive MiCAM ULTIMA-L system.

The study is timely and innovative; it presents an important step into the development of reliable low-cost optical mapping systems which are specifically important for pharmacological testing. The manuscript is well-written and the results are well-presented. I just have some minor concerns and suggestions on how to improve data presentation and discussion.

First, it would be highly beneficial for the readers if the authors show in a separate figure all the steps of signal conditioning, for both cameras, including raw signal from one pixel, signals after gaussian filtering and after time averaging.

We have added the S2 figure showing the signal during all steps of signal processing. We thank the reviewer for the suggestion and believe that new figure makes the signal quality of the camera much more clear for a potential reader.

Please see lines 134-140:

“The signals after all intermediate steps of signal conditioning for both cameras are shown in the S2 Figure. Raw iDS-recorded signal was, in general, noisier as compared to signals from MiCAM camera. While spatial filtering reduced the SNR to a level adequate to measure upstroke for activation sequence and conduction velocity (CV) analysis, both spatial and temporal averaging were required to measure APD. Therefore, only the former step of signal conditioning was used for the activation sequence and conduction velocity (CV) measurements.“

Two-second time averaging sounds like a significant limitation which does not allow mapping of cardiac arrhythmias or unstable spontaneous rhythm where cycle length changes in a beat-to-beat manner.

Indeed, this is a significant limitation. It should be noted though that in our publication we didn’t use the time averaging to measure the activation sequences and the conduction velocities. The reason behind that is that the upstroke of a signal is more robust and easier to measure then slower repolarization. Nevertheless the system might not allow the user to accurately measure the activation sequences in case of arrhythmia, because in general the signal tend to be more noisy in this case. We have added the text discussing both the limitations of the optical mapping system and differences between the measurements of APD and activation sequence.

Lines 244-246:

“RMSD between corresponding recordings by two cameras was equal to 4 cm/s even though ensemble averaging over 2 second recording was not used for these measurements ”

Please also see new lines 134-140 quoted above.

Lines 299-315 discussing the limitations are also added and quoted at the very end of this Response document.

Figure S2: It appears that there is a high variability of SNR between 7 mouse hearts shown. Two hearts have a very high SNR but in other three hearts SNR is significantly lower. I was wondering if SNR depends on the quality of staining? Can the authors show the SNR images overlapped with the corresponding fluorescence images (similar to those on Fig. 3A, B and Fig. 4A, B)?

We have added the amplitude of the fluorescence to the figure S2 (our original submitted version) but now the figure S3 (the new version of the manuscript). We believe that although there is some correlation between SNR and signal intensity, some other factors are involved, namely the uneven illumination of heart surface by a LED and overall viability of the tissue.

Hearts shown in Figure 3B and Figure 4A seem to be out of focus.

Thank you for pointing out this issue, we have changed the figure 3B (mouse heart) and redone the experiment with the rat heart (Fig. 4, and Fig. 8B,D). We believe that the quality of both the heart images and the recordings themselves have improved.

Figure 6: APD difference of 9 ms between the systems sounds too high (about 17% of baseline APD). Was this difference statistically significant? Where were these APDs calculated? Were they averaged throughout the entire mapped area of both ventricles? Would it be more accurate to measure APD separately in the right and the left ventricles? This may decrease the observed difference in APD obtained by different systems.

I assume that APD heterogeneity (dispersion) within the area of interest was relatively high that may also affect the average APD values shown and thus contribute to the observed difference. It would be beneficial to show APD heterogeneity measured within the area of interest for each system.

Figure 7: For both systems, APD looks very heterogeneous within the ventricles. Moreover, there are some regions with outliers: APD of 10 ms (dark blue areas) and more than 100 ms (dark red areas) seems to be not physiological. It would be helpful if the authors exclude these outliers and re-analyzed their data for Figure 5 and 6. It may significantly improve the results.

Indeed, the difference between the APDs as measured by two cameras is the issue. In a previous version of the manuscript the APD was averaged over the whole mapped area of both ventricles, excluding the regions with high SNR and over-saturating areas. The difference was not statistically significant, but p-value was relatively low (p=0.1). We have redone the analysis separating the ventricles and excluding the APD outliers. While the results improved, but the mean difference is still relatively high: 7+/- 12 ms for LV (p=0.30, paired t-test), 5+/-9 ms for RV (p=0.31). We believe that there are two reasons behind these differences: 1) some changes due to imperfect perfusion happened to the hearts between the measurements by two optical systems and 2) field of view was not exactly the same.

We thank the reviewer for the suggestion and have modified Figs 5 and 6. We have also outlined the region included in statistical analysis in the new version of Fig. 7 to make it clear for a reader. The numbers throughout the text were changed in accordance with new analysis.

Please also see new lines 149-152:

“APD outlier boundaries were calculated as Q1 - 1.5*IQR and Q3 + 1.5*IQR, where Q1 and Q3 denote first and third quartile respectively and IQR = Q3 - Q1 (interquartile range). Any value exceeding those boundaries was considered an outlier and was excluded from statistical analysis.”

Lines 177-178:

“APD80 measurements in left ventricle by two cameras differed by 7 ± 12 ms in control and 5 ± 5 ms in 4-AP; in right ventricle: 5 ± 9 ms in control, 6 ± 5 ms in 4-AP.”

Lines 256-258:

“This is also consistent with the fact that unpaired comparison between two cameras resulted in high p-values (unpaired t-test, p=0.42 in control, p=0.52 in 4-AP, compare to paired t-test in Fig. 5).“

Finally, the authors may consider including a special section in the discussion that would summarize major pros and contras for the presented system. This section should include the mention that this system might be not applicable for specific studies focused on cardiac arrhythmias (see above).

Thank you we have added the section. Please, see lines 299-315:

“We summarize the advantages and limitations of the proposed optical system as follows. (1) The price is more than 20 times cheaper than a specialized camera, making the system suitable for educational purposes or for the applications requiring the use of several cameras such as panoramic and multi-parametric mapping. (2) We have shown that despite the relatively low SNR, AP waveform, activation sequence and CV could be accurately measured after the signal processing via compatible open-source Rhythm software. It should be noted, that while only spatial binning was used for the activation sequence and CV, precise measurement of the AP waveform required temporal averaging over 2 second recordings. This requires that the AP waveform is limited to regular periodic heart rhythm while, for example, the recording of alternans is not always feasible. Moreover, arrythmia usually results in complex propagation patterns reducing overall SNR of the recording, which is likely to obstruct activation sequence recording as well. (3) As an example of practical application we have demonstrated in this study that drug effects on AP waveform can be measured by the optical-mapping system. However, as exemplified by atrial recordings in Fig. 4 C, thin myocardium tissue reduces the quality of the signal, which might hinder the use of the cheaper system in experiments involving the mapping of the monolayer cell cultures.“"

Attachment

Submitted filename: Response.docx

Decision Letter 1

Alexander V Panfilov

23 Feb 2022

Open-Source Low-Cost Cardiac Optical Mapping System

PONE-D-21-32419R1

Dear Dr. Syunyaev,

We’re pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been judged scientifically suitable for publication and will be formally accepted for publication once it meets all outstanding technical requirements.

Within one week, you’ll receive an e-mail detailing the required amendments. When these have been addressed, you’ll receive a formal acceptance letter and your manuscript will be scheduled for publication.

An invoice for payment will follow shortly after the formal acceptance. To ensure an efficient process, please log into Editorial Manager at http://www.editorialmanager.com/pone/, click the 'Update My Information' link at the top of the page, and double check that your user information is up-to-date. If you have any billing related questions, please contact our Author Billing department directly at authorbilling@plos.org.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please notify them about your upcoming paper to help maximize its impact. If they’ll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team as soon as possible -- no later than 48 hours after receiving the formal acceptance. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information, please contact onepress@plos.org.

Kind regards,

Alexander V Panfilov, PhD

Section Editor

PLOS ONE

Additional Editor Comments (optional):

Reviewers' comments:

Reviewer's Responses to Questions

Comments to the Author

1. If the authors have adequately addressed your comments raised in a previous round of review and you feel that this manuscript is now acceptable for publication, you may indicate that here to bypass the “Comments to the Author” section, enter your conflict of interest statement in the “Confidential to Editor” section, and submit your "Accept" recommendation.

Reviewer #1: All comments have been addressed

**********

2. Is the manuscript technically sound, and do the data support the conclusions?

The manuscript must describe a technically sound piece of scientific research with data that supports the conclusions. Experiments must have been conducted rigorously, with appropriate controls, replication, and sample sizes. The conclusions must be drawn appropriately based on the data presented.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

3. Has the statistical analysis been performed appropriately and rigorously?

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

4. Have the authors made all data underlying the findings in their manuscript fully available?

The PLOS Data policy requires authors to make all data underlying the findings described in their manuscript fully available without restriction, with rare exception (please refer to the Data Availability Statement in the manuscript PDF file). The data should be provided as part of the manuscript or its supporting information, or deposited to a public repository. For example, in addition to summary statistics, the data points behind means, medians and variance measures should be available. If there are restrictions on publicly sharing data—e.g. participant privacy or use of data from a third party—those must be specified.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

5. Is the manuscript presented in an intelligible fashion and written in standard English?

PLOS ONE does not copyedit accepted manuscripts, so the language in submitted articles must be clear, correct, and unambiguous. Any typographical or grammatical errors should be corrected at revision, so please note any specific errors here.

Reviewer #1: Yes

**********

6. Review Comments to the Author

Please use the space provided to explain your answers to the questions above. You may also include additional comments for the author, including concerns about dual publication, research ethics, or publication ethics. (Please upload your review as an attachment if it exceeds 20,000 characters)

Reviewer #1: The authors successfully addressed all my questions and concerns. I do not have additional comments.

**********

7. PLOS authors have the option to publish the peer review history of their article (what does this mean?). If published, this will include your full peer review and any attached files.

If you choose “no”, your identity will remain anonymous but your review may still be made public.

Do you want your identity to be public for this peer review? For information about this choice, including consent withdrawal, please see our Privacy Policy.

Reviewer #1: No

Acceptance letter

Alexander V Panfilov

28 Feb 2022

PONE-D-21-32419R1

Open-source low-cost cardiac optical mapping system

Dear Dr. Syunyaev:

I'm pleased to inform you that your manuscript has been deemed suitable for publication in PLOS ONE. Congratulations! Your manuscript is now with our production department.

If your institution or institutions have a press office, please let them know about your upcoming paper now to help maximize its impact. If they'll be preparing press materials, please inform our press team within the next 48 hours. Your manuscript will remain under strict press embargo until 2 pm Eastern Time on the date of publication. For more information please contact onepress@plos.org.

If we can help with anything else, please email us at plosone@plos.org.

Thank you for submitting your work to PLOS ONE and supporting open access.

Kind regards,

PLOS ONE Editorial Office Staff

on behalf of

Prof. Alexander V Panfilov

Section Editor

PLOS ONE

Associated Data

    This section collects any data citations, data availability statements, or supplementary materials included in this article.

    Supplementary Materials

    S1 Fig. Interactive image acquisition software.

    Screenshots of image acquisition software. Real-time viewfinder feed allows the user to adjust settings when signal amplitude is too low (B,C) or oversaturating (D).

    (TIF)

    S2 Fig. Signal conditioning.

    Samples of the signal from a single pixel after different steps of conditioning.

    (TIF)

    S3 Fig. SNR and intensity maps.

    SNR maps and intensity maps for conditioned recordings of 6 mouse hearts recorded with iDS camera at PCL = 150 ms.

    (TIF)

    S1 Table. Component prices in the MiCAM Ultimate-L system and the system presented in this study.

    (DOCX)

    S1 Text. Software links and supporting figures.

    (PDF)

    Attachment

    Submitted filename: Response.docx

    Data Availability Statement

    All optical mapping recordings files is available from the zenodo database DOI:10.5281/zenodo.5557829


    Articles from PLoS ONE are provided here courtesy of PLOS

    RESOURCES