Combination of “quadratic adaptive algorithm” and “hybrid operator splitting” or uniformization algorithms for stability against acceleration in the Markov model of sodium ion channels in the ventricular cell model
The Markovian model has generally been used for cardiac electrophysiological simulations. However, the Markovian model is so stiff that speeding up the computation of the algorithms with variable time-steps always results in simulation instability. In particular, the unstable simulations always occur at a low voltage rate or current change, while transition rates in the Markovian model are changing markedly. The uniformization (UNI) method allows for a Markovian model simulation with high stability but also a high computation cost. To save computation costs with variable time-steps, we propose a speed increasing idea that is a compromise to the trade-off between stability and acceleration by combining Chen-Chen-Luo’s “quadratic adaptive algorithm” (CCL) method with “hybrid operator splitting” (HOS) into the solver (CCL + HOS solver). The computation cost of this CCL + HOS solver is approximately 24 times lower than the CCL + UNI solver, and the CCL + HOS solver can function 295 times faster in comparison to the HOS solver with a fixed time-step (DT). The suggested optimal solver should be CCL + HOS solver with a maximum time-step at 0.1 ms due to its high speed with low error. Additionally, the CCL method has much better performance and stability than the hybrid method in this single-cell model simulation.
Computer simulation Ventricular cell model Action potential Markovian model of sodium channel Adaptive algorithm
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
This work was supported by Sun Yat-sen University, China, under Scientific Initiation Project (No.67000-18821109) for High-level Experts. M.-H. Chen was supported by the Ministry of Science and Technology of Taiwan under grant 106-2115-M-006-010-.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Clancy CE, Rudy Y (1999) Linking a genetic defect to its cellular phenotype in a cardiac arrhythmia. Nature 400:566, 569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greer-Short A, George SA, Poelzing S, Weinberg SH (2017) Revealing the concealed nature of long-QT type 3 syndrome. Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol 10:e004400CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campana C, Gando I, Tan RB, Cecchin F, Coetzee WA, Sobie EA (2018) Population-based mathematical modeling to deduce disease-causing cardiac Na + channel gating defects. Biophys J 114:634a–635aCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moreno JD, Lewis TJ, Clancy CE (2016) Parameterization for in-silico modeling of ion channel interactions with drugs. PLoS One 11:e0150761CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Spiteri RJ, Dean RC (2010) Stiffness analysis of cardiac electrophysiological models. Ann Biomed Eng 38:3592, 3604CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reibman A, Trivedi K (1988) Numerical transient analysis of Markov models. Comput Oper Res 15:19–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gomes JM, Alvarenga A, Campos RS, Rocha BM, da Silva APC, dos Santos RW (2015) Uniformization method for solving cardiac electrophysiology models based on the Markov-chain formulation. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 62:600–608CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Starý T, Biktashev VN (2015) Exponential integrators for a Markov chain model of the fast sodium channel of cardiomyocytes. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 62:1070–1076CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Victorri B, Vinet A, Roberge FA, Drouhard J-P (1985) Numerical integration in the reconstruction of cardiac action potentials using Hodgkin-Huxley-type models. Comput Biomed Res 18:10–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luo CH, Rudy Y (1991) A model of the ventricular cardiac action potential. Depolarization, repolarization, and their interaction. Circ Res 68:1501–1526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chen MH, Chen PY, Luo CH (2016) Quadratic adaptive algorithm for solving cardiac action potential models. Comput Biol Med 77:261–273CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Clancy CE, Rudy Y (2002) Na+ channel mutation that causes both Brugada and long-QT syndrome phenotypes. Circulation 105:1208–1213CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Luo CH, Rudy Y (1994) A dynamic model of the cardiac ventricular action potential. I. Simulations of ionic currents and concentration changes. Circ Res 74:1071–1096CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sidje RB, Burrage K, MacNamara S (2007) Inexact uniformization method for computing transient distributions of Markov chains. SIAM J Sci Comput 29:2562–2580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rudy Y, Silva JR (2006) Computational biology in the study of cardiac ion channels and cell electrophysiology. Q Rev Biophys 39:57–116CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hille B (2001) Ion channels of excitable membranes, vol 507. Sinauer, Sunderland, MAGoogle Scholar
Marsh ME, Ziaratgahi ST, Spiteri RJ (2012) The secrets to the success of the Rush-Larsen method and its generalizations. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 59:2506–2515CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van Moorsel AP, Sanders WH (1997) Transient solution of Markov models by combining adaptive and standard uniformization. IEEE Trans Reliab 46:430–440CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Qu Z, Garfinkel A (1999) An advanced algorithm for solving partial differential equation in cardiac conduction. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng 46:1166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Krishnamoorthi S, Sarkar M, Klug WS (2013) Numerical quadrature and operator splitting in finite element methods for cardiac electrophysiology. Int J Numer Method Biomed Eng 29:1243–1266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Torabi Ziaratgahi S, Marsh ME, Sundnes J, Spiteri RJ (2014) Stable time integration suppresses unphysical oscillations in the bidomain model. Front Phys 2:40CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Starý T, Biktashev VN (2015) Evaluating exponential integrators for Markov chain ion channel models. In: Computing in Cardiology Conference, 2015. pp 885–888Google Scholar
Moreno JD, Yang PC, Bankston JR, Grandi E, Bers DM, Kass RS, Clancy CE (2013) Ranolazine for congenital and acquired late INa-linked arrhythmias: in silico pharmacological screening. Circ Res 113:E50–E61CrossRefGoogle Scholar