ArticleJournal of arrhythmia2026
Do Stimulants Promote Arrhythmic Risk: Insights From a Human-Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell-Derived Cardiomyocyte Model.
Article in Journal of arrhythmia, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Stimulant medications are widely prescribed for ADHD. Although generally considered safe, their use in patients with underlying cardiac conditions remains a concern due to potential arrhythmic risk. Objective: To evaluate the effects of commonly prescribed stimulants on key electrophysiological parameters associated with arrhythmia risk in chamber-specific human induced pluripotent stem cell-derived cardiomyocytes (hiPSC-CMs). Methods: Atrial and ventricular hiPSC-CMs were plated on a multielectrode array (MEA) platform and exposed to clinically relevant plasma concentrations of methylphenidate, dextroamphetamine, atomoxetine, caffeine, or the β-agonist isoproterenol. Extracellular field potentials were recorded over 48 h to assess acute and prolonged effects on conduction velocity (CV), beat rate (BR), and corrected field potential duration (FPDc). Results: CV was largely preserved across all stimulant conditions in both atrial and ventricular hiPSC-CMs, while isoproterenol produced a modest early increase. All stimulants transiently elevated BR during the first hour of exposure, followed by a progressive decline over time. Isoproterenol and caffeine induced robust and sustained increases in BR, confirming model responsiveness. FPDc was prolonged by all stimulant compounds, most prominently by atomoxetine, consistent with its known I Conclusion: At clinically relevant plasma concentrations, stimulants modulated automaticity and repolarization but had minimal impact on conduction in hiPSC-CMs. The preservation of CV suggests that these compounds are unlikely to alter myocardial conduction at therapeutic doses. The observed effects on BR and FPDc warrant further mechanistic studies to understand how these changes may contribute to arrhythmia risk in susceptible populations.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.