ArticleHeart rhythm2019
Subcutaneous nerve stimulation for rate control in ambulatory dogs with persistent atrial fibrillation.
Article in Heart rhythm, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Using subcutaneous nerve stimulation to control atrial fibrillation.Heart rhythm O2 · 2026Article
- Autonomic nervous system modulation in arrhythmias: mechanisms and therapeutic advances.Frontiers in physiology · 2026Review
- Anatomy, Imaging, and Clinical Significance of the Cervicothoracic (Stellate) Ganglion.Diagnostics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Review
- Development of neuromodulation for atrial fibrillation: a narrative review.Journal of thoracic disease · 2024Review
- Autonomic Modulation of Atrial Fibrillation.JACC. Basic to translational science · 2023Review
- Referred Somatic Hyperalgesia Mediates Cardiac Regulation by the Activation of Sympathetic Nerves in a Rat Model of Myocardial Ischemia.Neuroscience bulletin · 2022Article
- Advancing the Understanding of Acupoint Sensitization and Plasticity Through Cutaneous C-Nociceptors.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2022Review
- Neural Mechanisms and Therapeutic Opportunities for Atrial Fibrillation.Methodist DeBakey cardiovascular journal · 2021Review
- Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
13 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundSubcutaneous nerve stimulation (ScNS) damages the stellate ganglion and improves rhythm control of atrial fibrillation (AF) in ambulatory dogs.
objectiveThe purpose of this study was to test the hypothesis that thoracic ScNS can improve rate control in persistent AF.
methodsWe created persistent AF in 13 dogs and randomly assigned them to ScNS (n = 6) and sham control (n = 7) groups.
resultsThe average stellate ganglion nerve activity reduced from 4.00 ± 1.68 μV after the induction of persistent AF to 1.72 ± 0.42 μV (P = .032) after ScNS. In contrast, the average stellate ganglion nerve activity increased from 3.01 ± 1.26 μV during AF to 5.52 ± 2.69 μV after sham stimulation (P = .023). The mean ventricular rate during persistent AF reduced from 149 ± 36 to 84 ± 16 beats/min (P = .011) in the ScNS group, but no changes were observed in the sham control group. The left ventricular ejection fraction remained unchanged in the ScNS group but reduced significantly in the sham control group. Immunostaining showed damaged ganglion cells in bilateral stellate ganglia and increased brain stem glial cell reaction in the ScNS group but not in the control group. The
conclusionThoracic ScNS causes neural remodeling in the brain stem and stellate ganglia, controls the ventricular rate, and preserves the left ventricular ejection fraction in ambulatory dogs with persistent AF.
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.