ArticlePhysiological reports2019
Effect of vagus nerve stimulation on blood glucose concentration in epilepsy patients - Importance of stimulation parameters.
Article in Physiological reports, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.
- [Research advances in neuromodulation techniques for blood glucose regulation and diabetes intervention].Sheng wu yi xue gong cheng xue za zhi = Journal of biomedical engineering = Shengwu yixue gongchengxue zazhi · 2023Article
- Review
- Transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation augments postprandial inhibition of ghrelin.Physiological reports · 2022Article
- Chronic vagus nerve stimulation for drug-resistant epilepsy may influence fasting blood glucose concentration.Biomedical engineering online · 2020Article
- Short-term discontinuation of vagal nerve stimulation altersEJNMMI research · 2019Article
- Effect of vagus nerve stimulation on blood glucose concentration in epilepsy patients - Importance of stimulation parameters.Physiological reports · 2019Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In previous animal experiments, we demonstrated that cervical vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) inhibits pancreatic insulin secretion, thereby raises blood glucose levels, and impairs glucose tolerance through afferent signaling. However, there are no reports suggesting that similar effects occur in patients treated with chronic cervical VNS for epilepsy. In contrast to clinical VNS used for epilepsy, where the stimulation is intermittent with cycles of on and off periods, stimulation was continuous in our previous animal experiments. Thus, we hypothesized that the timing of the stimulation on/off cycles is critical to prevent impaired glucose tolerance in epilepsy patients chronically treated with cervical VNS. We conducted a retrospective analysis of medical records from patients with epilepsy. Blood glucose levels did not differ between patients treated with pharmacotherapy only (98 ± 4 mg/dL, n = 16) and patients treated with VNS plus pharmacotherapy (99 ± 3 mg/dL, n = 24, duration of VNS 4.5 ± 0.5 years). However, a multiple linear correlation analysis of patients with VNS demonstrated that during the follow-up period of 7.9 ± 0.7 years, blood glucose levels increased in patients with long on and short off periods, whereas blood glucose did not change or even decreased in patients that were stimulated with short on and long off periods. We conclude that chronic cervical VNS in patients with epilepsy is unlikely to induce glucose intolerance or hyperglycemia with commonly used stimulation parameters. However, stimulation on times of longer than 25 sec may bear a risk for hyperglycemia, especially if the stimulation off time is shorter than 200 sec.
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.