ArticlePhysiological reports2016
Long-term spinal cord stimulation modifies canine intrinsic cardiac neuronal properties and ganglionic transmission during high-frequency repetitive activation.
Article in Physiological reports, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Electrical properties and synaptic transmission in mouse intracardiac ganglion neurons in situ.Physiological reports · 2021Article
- [Effect of spinal cord stimulation on myocardial ischemia/infarction].Zhejiang da xue xue bao. Yi xue ban = Journal of Zhejiang University. Medical sciences · 2018Article
- Synaptic Plasticity in Cardiac Innervation and Its Potential Role in Atrial Fibrillation.Frontiers in physiology · 2018Review
- Cardiac Electrophysiological Effects of Light-Activated Chloride Channels.Frontiers in physiology · 2018Article
- Long-term spinal cord stimulation modifies canine intrinsic cardiac neuronal properties and ganglionic transmission during high-frequency repetitive activation.Physiological reports · 2016Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
Long-term spinal cord stimulation (SCS) applied to cranial thoracic SC segments exerts antiarrhythmic and cardioprotective actions in the canine heart in situ. We hypothesized that remodeling of intrinsic cardiac neuronal and synaptic properties occur in canines subjected to long-term SCS, specifically that synaptic efficacy may be preferentially facilitated at high presynaptic nerve stimulation frequencies. Animals subjected to continuous SCS for 5-8 weeks (long-term SCS: n = 17) or for 1 h (acute SCS: n = 4) were compared with corresponding control animals (long-term: n = 15, acute: n = 4). At termination, animals were anesthetized, the heart was excised and neurones from the right atrial ganglionated plexus were identified and studied in vitro using standard intracellular microelectrode technique. Main findings were as follows: (1) a significant reduction in whole cell membrane input resistance and acceleration of the course of AHP decay identified among phasic neurones from long-term SCS compared with controls, (2) significantly more robust synaptic transmission to rundown in long-term SCS during high-frequency (10-40 Hz) presynaptic nerve stimulation while recording from either phasic or accommodating postsynaptic neurones; this was associated with significantly greater posttrain excitatory postsynaptic potential (EPSP) numbers in long-term SCS than control, and (3) synaptic efficacy was significantly decreased by atropine in both groups. Such changes did not occur in acute SCS In conclusion, modification of intrinsic cardiac neuronal properties and facilitation of synaptic transmission at high stimulation frequency in long-term SCS could improve physiologically modulated vagal inputs to the heart.
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.