ArticleJournal of translational medicine2014
Chronic vagus nerve stimulation improves left ventricular function in a canine model of chronic mitral regurgitation.
Article in Journal of translational medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 4 citations in OpenAlex.
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 at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundAutonomic dysfunction, characterized by sympathetic activation and vagal withdrawal, contributes to the progression of heart failure (HF). We hypothesized that chronic vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) could prevent left ventricular (LV) remodeling and dysfunction in a canine HF model induced by chronic mitral regurgitation (MR). METHODS AND
resultsAfter the MR inducing procedure, 12 survived canines were randomly divided into the control (n = 6) and the VNS (n = 6) groups. At month 2, a VNS stimulator system was implanted in all canines. From month 3 to month 6, VNS therapy was applied in the VNS group but not in the control group. At month 6, compared with the control group, the canines in VNS group had significantly higher cardiac output (2.3 ± 0.3 versus 2.9 ± 0.4 L/min, P < 0.05, LV forward stroke volume (20.1 ± 3.7 versus 24.8 ± 3.9 ml, P < 0.05), and end-systolic stiffness constant (2.2 ± 0.3 versus 2.7 ± 0.3, P < 0.05). NT-proBNP and C-reactive protein were decreased significantly in the VNS group. However, no statistical difference was found in LV ejection fraction, LV end-diastolic dimension, LV end-diastolic volume, myocyte cross-sectional area, or collagen volume fraction between two groups.
conclusionsChronic VNS therapy may ameliorate MR-induced LV contractile dysfunction and improve the expression of biomarkers, but has less effect in improving LV chamber remodeling.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.