Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32027928›Full record

ArticleExperimental neurology2020

Parametric characterization of the rat Hering-Breuer reflex evoked with implanted and non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation.

Jesse E Bucksot, Karen Morales Castelan, Samantha K Skipton, Seth A Hays

Open access · greenAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Experimental neurology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
1.8field-weighted citation impact, top 15% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 34 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Computational modeling of autonomic nerve stimulation: Vagus et al.Current opinion in biomedical engineering · 2024
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Jesse E BucksotThe University of Texas at Dallas, Erik Jonsson School of Engineering and Computer Science, Richardson, TX, United States of America. Electronic address: jxb161230@utdallas.edu.
Karen Morales CastelanThe University of Texas at Dallas, School of Behavioral Brain Sciences, Richardson, TX, United States of America.
Samantha K SkiptonThe University of Texas at Dallas, School of Behavioral Brain Sciences, Richardson, TX, United States of America.
Seth A HaysThe University of Texas at Dallas, Erik Jonsson School of Engineering and Computer Science, Richardson, TX, United States of America; The University of Texas at Dallas, School of Behavioral Brain Sciences, Richardson, TX, United States of America; Texas Biomedical Device Center, Richardson, TX, United States of America.
The University of Texas at Dallas · USTexas Biomedical Research Institute · US

Funding

Evaluation of the Neuromodulatory Mechanisms of Vagus Nerve Stimulation to Improve Motor Rehabilitation after StrokeR01NS094384 · NINDS · UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS DALLAS · PI HAYS, SETH ALANSON · 2016 to 2020
$1.7M
NINDS NIH HHS R01 NS094384
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) has rapidly gained interest as a treatment for a variety of disorders. A number of methods have been employed to stimulate the vagus nerve, but the most common relies on a cuff electrode implanted around the cervical branch of the nerve. Recently, two non-invasive methods have increased in popularity: transcutaneous cervical VNS (tcVNS) and transcutaneous auricular VNS (taVNS). Despite promising clinical results, there has been little direct comparison of these methods to stimulation delivered via an implanted device. In this study, we directly compared both non-invasive strategies to stimulation with an implanted cuff electrode on activation of the Hering-Breuer (HB) reflex, a non-invasive biomarker of A-fiber activation in the vagus. Stimulation was delivered across a wide range of parameters using tcVNS, taVNS, and an implanted cuff electrode in female rats. Activation of the HB reflex, changes in heart rate, and neck muscle twitch force were recorded. Consistent with low thresholds reported in previous studies, we found that the threshold to activate the HB reflex using an implanted cuff electrode was 0.406 ± 0.066 mA. tcVNS was capable of activating the HB reflex, but the threshold was 34.18 ± 1.86 mA, over 15 fold higher than the stimulation intensity that caused twitching of the neck muscles (2.09 ± 0.16 mA). No activation of the HB reflex was observed with taVNS at any parameters. These results describe activation of the HB reflex with each strategy and provide initial evidence regarding differences in the activation of the vagus nerve with invasive and non-invasive methods.

Indexed as

AnimalsFemaleHeart RateMuscle ContractionNeck MusclesNerve Fibers, MyelinatedRatsRats, Sprague-DawleyReflexVagus NerveVagus Nerve StimulationAuricularNon-invasiveTranscutaneousVagus nerve stimulation

Identifiers

PMID32027928
PMCPMC7089831
OpenAlexW3003830098

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.