$$\rightleftharpoonup{xx}$$
$$\longleftharp{xx}$$,
$$\longrightharp{xx}$$,
The viability and plating density of post-thawed hiPSC-CMs is critical for multiwell MEA culture. Pre-plating of 1-2 million hiPSC-CMs/vial into two wells of a 6-well tissue culture plate with 50% or greater viability will produce a healthy monolayer culture with spontaneous beating at 48 h. Poor viability of CMs will result in cultures with a high percentage of non-myocyte populations. These monolayers when dissociated for multiwell MEA plating generally produce inconsistent results and bad quality signals and therefore should be discarded. Figure 1 shows examples of optimal vs. sub-optimal hiPSC-CMs cultures at 48 h post plating. Thawing the CMs on substrate-coated tissue culture plates rather than directly on multiwell MEAs, allows for cell recovery and maturation3. Direct plating of cryopreserved CMs on the array is not recommended as it produced inconsistent results.
In addition to the quality of the dissociated CMs, cell attachment on multiwell MEA is highly dependent on cell density and the fibronectin coating technique. The fibronectin droplet size is critical as the CMs will conform to the boundaries of the fibronectin-coated area. For this reason, only 5 µL of the fibronectin solution are dispensed directly over the electrode array area. To ensure that the droplet does not disperse, the well surface must be completely dry at the time of coating. Figure 2 shows the layout of the multiwell MEA plate with schematics of step-by-step pretreatment for optimal preparation. Additionally, to prevent the fibronectin from drying the multiwell MEA plates must be placed inside a humidifying chamber during the incubation period lasting no more than 3 h (see step 3.8). Once the incubation period is complete, it is important to remove the fibronectin droplet from each well just before CM plating and only then proceed to next well plating. Working swiftly and carefully dispensing of the CMs is the key to successful cell attachment.
hiPSC-CM cultures at 30 days post-differentiation are dissociated for multiwell MEA plating using the enzymatic cell dissociation method (see step 4). CMs will attach to the fibronectin-coated MEA surfaces by 3 h and a monolayer covering the arrays will be visible after 24 h post-plating (Figure 3). Synchronous beating of the monolayer will be observed at 24-48 h. Cell droplet dispersion will affect the culture density or even lead to drying and cell death. Precise cell placement directly on the array is of utmost importance and therefore the technique must be practiced for optimal plating. Cell adhesion to the reference electrode will hinder electrical signal production. See Figure 3 for images of optimal CM placement, and culture after 24 h.
The CMs cultured on multiwell MEAs are subjected to quality check for electrical activity at 48 h post-plating. Typically, FP signal amplitude increases from the µV range to mV in approximately 4 days3. If 50% of the electrodes within a network and 70% of the total networks do not produce FP signals, then the network or the culture are suboptimal and should be discarded. Only cultures that pass the quality check are processed for FP and AP analysis. Figure 6 shows examples of good and sub-standard FP signals.
Electroporation-mediated AP recordings can be obtained multiple times from cultures 48 h post-MEA plating. Employing electroporation, we gained intracellular access to record high-resolution APs from multiple hiPSC-derived cardiomyocyte networks. Low-voltage pulses (1 V, 1 ms, 1 Hz) for 30 s were delivered for transient, reversible transformation of FP to AP. The electroporation allows successful intracellular access for AP measurement in approximately 75% of the electrodes. Electrical signals are recorded for 2 min that include 30 s pre-electroporation, 30 s during and 1 min post-electroporation. A train of 10 s AP waveforms 10 s post-electroporation are evaluated across all sites for signal quality and analysis. Any trace not conforming to pure AP signal are discarded. To investigate if AP amplitudes correlate to FP signal we electroporated all 288 sites to simultaneously record waveforms. Representative FP and AP signals recorded from the same cell site from two different electrodes are shown in Figure 11A. We observed no correlation between FP amplitudes and post electroporation AP amplitudes recorded from the same cell site. Additionally, multiple electroporations of the same cell site at 0, 24, 48, 72 and 96 h had no significant effect on the AP shape over time (Figure 11B).
Given the high-throughput nature of the system, a manual technique to extract and quantify parameters of interest such as RR interval, instantaneous frequency and differential action potential duration is inefficient and time consuming. A custom-built MATLAB script available to the research community upon request is employed to perform waveform measurements with 1 µs resolution. Electroporation time points are overlaid with the extracted signal to identify 10 s of AP post-electroporation to conduct signal extraction, quality assurance, and segmentation workflow (Figure 8, Figure 9, Figure 10). The user interface allows for selection of the desired segment using the overlaid electroporation indicators as a guide. The segmented waveform is processed by subroutines to further identify individual AP waveforms. This is completed through peak detection, where the highest and lowest voltage is identified for each cycle. Once this process is completed, the amplitudes are normalized, and the associating time vectors are shifted to define time zero at a peak value of 1. Interpolation of intersection points along the individual cycles was used to determine APD measurements. Thus, partial automation workflow for AP waveform segmentation allows efficient data analysis for various APD parameters across multiple batches of cultures in a short period of time. Further automation of inclusion and exclusion criteria for FPs and APs is ongoing for real-time data analysis.
A significant advantage of the multiwell MEA plate is that it can be reused multiple times. This restoration enables repetitive electrophysiological studies for cost-effective and consistent data collection. Recordings of APs from the same array after 6 restorations are shown in Figure 12. Signal-to-noise ratio is similar across multiple reuses. To demonstrate the reliability of the array for repetitive electrophysiological studies, a total of 3815 AP waveforms are pooled from three restoration batches and AP duration data is extracted to examine the repeatability of the results. Distribution plots for individual waveform APD30, APD80, triangulation (APD80—APD30) and fractional shortening ((APD80—APD30)/(APD80)) are displayed (Figure 13).

Figure 1: Pre-plating of cryopreserved hiPSC-CM for maturation. (A) Cell processing for pre-plating 1 vial of 10 days post-differentiation cryopreserved hiPSC-CMs. (B) Phase contrast images of successful (left) and unsuccessful (right) hiPSC cultures. Scale bar: 275 µm. See Video 1 and Video 2 for successful 14 and 24 days post-differentiation culture examples. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 2: Multiwell MEA plate setup and preparation. (A) Multiwell MEA plate schematics: The plate consists of 24 wells (A1 through D6) each containing 12 microelectrode arrays and 4 peripheral reference electrodes. Electrode diameter: 30 µm / Inter-electrode distance: 300 µm. Recordings can be obtained from the 288 electrodes simultaneously. (B) Sterilization and hydrophilic treatment steps to be conducted prior to hiPSC-CM plating. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 3: hiPSC-CM dissociation and plating on Multiwell MEA plate. (A) Schematics of hiPSC-CM MEA plating steps for each well. (B) Microscopic image illustrating correct cell droplet placement covering all 12 electrodes without spreading to the 4 reference electrodes. (C) Phase contrast microscopic images of an exemplary (left) and suboptimal (right) hiPSC-CM platting on MEA at 24 h post-plating. Scale bar= 275 µm. See Video 3 for successful MEA plating example. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 4: Multiwell-screen acquisition software. Arrows indicate the location of key features and functions referenced in the text: Temperature Control (1) panel allows for real time temperature monitoring throughout the experiment. Insert/Eject (2) button engage and release the Multiwell MEA Plate. Define Experimental Flow (3) function allows the user to set the duration of the recording. Data Acquisition Setup (4) function allows the user to set the sampling rate and acquisition filter settings. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 5: hiPSC-CM electroporation and signal acquisition. Stimulus Definition tab allows the user to define the electroporating pulse parameters. Stimulation Electrodes tab allows the user to select the electroporating electrodes. Any combination of the 288 electrodes can be selected. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 6: Quality check of Multiwell MEAs for electrical activity. Multiwell-Screen acquisition software showing raw data windows with representative examples of optimal (A) and sub-standard (B) FP signals. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 7: FP and AP signals from the new and restored array. Multiwell MEA enzymatic cleaning steps (A). The baseline signal of the new array shows minimal signal to noise ratio (B) and FP signals show the electrical activity of the network (C). Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 8: Data segmentation and analysis. View of GUI’s main window for Waveform Analysis. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 9: Data segmentation and analysis. Initialize Waveforms button to identify and extract AP waveforms for segmentation and to start the preliminary processing by zooming in and selecting the action potential area of interest. Red circles are the electroporation indicators. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 10: Data segmentation and analysis. Peaks (red ‘x’) and troughs (yellow circles) are detected for every waveform and the normalized APs are superimposed for a quality check of the waveforms. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 11: AP Amplitude dependence on the FP signal for multiple recordings from the same cell site. FP amplitude in µV ranges (A, top left panel) or mV ranges (A, top right panel) recorded from two independent electrodes produce AP amplitude in mV range (A, bottom left and right panels) showing no correlation between FP amplitudes and post-electroporation AP amplitudes. The normalized AP waveforms for each recording are superimposed as shown for each recording. Multiple electroporations of the same cell site at 0 to 96 h produced high quality AP waveforms allowing tracking of membrane electrodynamics (B). Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 12: AP recordings after six restorations. AP waveforms recorded simultaneously 10 s post-electroporation across 12 electrodes from the same well are displayed. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.

Figure 13: APD parameter histograms from multiple restorations. Distribution plots for individual waveform APD30 (A), APD80 (B), triangulation (APD80—APD30) (C) and fractional shortening ((APD80—APD30)/(APD80)) (D) are displayed. Please click here to view a larger version of this figure.
Supplementary files. Videos 1-3. Please click here to download this file.