Peer-reviewed veterinary case report
Gap junction peptide GAP-134 reduces atrial fibrillation in dogs
By Laurent, Gabriel et al.·Published in Circulation. Arrhythmia and electrophysiology·2009·Li Ka Shing Knowledge Institute, Canada·View original on PubMed →
PetCaseFinder translated the abstract of this peer-reviewed paper into plain English so pet owners can read it. We do not publish original research — every detail traces back to the citation above. How we work →
Original publication title: Effects of chronic gap junction conduction-enhancing antiarrhythmic peptide GAP-134 administration on experimental atrial fibrillation in dogs.
- Species:
- dog
Plain-English summary
A group of dogs with heart issues related to atrial fibrillation (AF) were given a new oral treatment called GAP-134 to see if it could help reduce their symptoms. After 14 days of treatment, the dogs showed some improvement in heart function, particularly in those with less severe heart changes. While GAP-134 didn't completely eliminate AF, it did lower the duration of AF episodes in some dogs. Overall, the treatment showed promise for certain cases of AF in dogs, but more research is needed to understand its full potential.
People also search for: dog atrial fibrillation treatment · GAP-134 for dogs · heart problems in dogs · how to manage dog heart disease
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Abnormal intercellular communication caused by connexin dysfunction may contribute to atrial fibrillation (AF). The present study assessed the effect of the gap junction conduction-enhancing antiarrhythmic peptide GAP-134 on AF inducibility and maintenance in a dog model of atrial cardiomyopathy. METHODS AND RESULTS: Twenty-four dogs subject to simultaneous atrioventricular pacing (220 bpm for 14 days) were randomly assigned to placebo treatment (PACED-CTRL; 12 dogs) or oral GAP-134 (2.9 mg/kg BID; PACED-GAP-134; 12 dogs) starting on day 0. UNPACED-CTRL (4 dogs) and UNPACED-GAP-134 (4 dogs) served as additional control groups. Change in left atrial (LA) systolic area from baseline to 14 days was calculated using transoesophageal echocardiography. At 14 days, animals underwent an open-chest electrophysiological study. PACED-CTRL dogs (versus UNPACED-CTRL) had a shorter estimated LA wavelength (8.0+/-1.4 versus 24.4+/-2.5 cm, P<0.05) and a greater AF vulnerability (mean AF duration, 1588+/-329 versus 25+/-34 seconds, P<0.05). Oral GAP-134 had no effect on AF vulnerability in UNPACED dogs. Compared with PACED-CTRL dogs, PACED-GAP-134 dogs had a longer estimated LA wavelength (10.2+/-2.8 versus 8.0+/-1.4 cm, respectively, P<0.05). Oral GAP-134 did not significantly reduce AF inducibility or maintenance in the entire group of 24 PACED dogs; in a subgroup of dogs (n=11) with less than 100% increase in LA systolic area, oral GAP-134 reduced AF induction from 100% to 40% and mean AF duration from 1737+/-120 to 615+/-280 seconds (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Oral GAP-134 reduces pacing-induced decrease in LA wavelength and appears to attenuate AF vulnerability in dogs with less atrial mechanical remodeling. Gap junction modulation may affect AF in some circumstances.
Find similar cases for your pet
PetCaseFinder finds other peer-reviewed reports of pets with the same symptoms, plus a plain-English summary of what was tried across them.
Search related cases →Original publication on PubMed: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/19808462/