Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39687279›Full record

Trial reportOsteoarthritis and cartilage open2025

Safety and preliminary efficacy of transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation on chronic knee pain: A pilot trial.

Kosaku Aoyagi, Elias Rivas, Roxanna Shababi, Robert Edwards, Michael LaValley, Julia Lechuga, Vitaly Napadow, Tuhina Neogi

Registry-linked trialAbstract readClinical Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in Osteoarthritis and cartilage open, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT05625178 (Investigating Effects of Auricular Vagus Nerve Stimulation on Central Pain Mechanisms, Autonomic Function, and Pain Severity in People With Knee Osteoarthritis), which is not on this map. Cited by 10 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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.

NCT05625178 nacompletednot on this map

Investigating Effects of Auricular Vagus Nerve Stimulation on Central Pain Mechanisms, Autonomic Function, and Pain Severity in People With Knee Osteoarthritis

TypeinterventionalSponsorUniversity of Texas, El PasoRan2022 to 2023Enrolled30ConditionsKnee Osteoarthritis, Central Pain SyndromeArmsTranscutaneous vagus nerve stimulation
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Trial
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. 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

8 authors.

Kosaku AoyagiDepartment of Physical Therapy and Movement Sciences, University of Texas at El Paso, United States.
Elias RivasDepartment of Physical Therapy and Movement Sciences, University of Texas at El Paso, United States.
Roxanna ShababiDepartment of Physical Therapy and Movement Sciences, University of Texas at El Paso, United States.
Robert EdwardsBrigham and Women's Hospital, Harvard Medical School, United States.
Michael LaValleyDepartment of Public Health, Boston University, United States.
Julia LechugaDepartment of Physical Therapy and Movement Sciences, University of Texas at El Paso, United States.
Vitaly NapadowDepartment of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, Spaulding Rehabilitation Hospital, Harvard Medical School, United States.
Tuhina NeogiSection of Rheumatology Boston University Chobanian & Avedisian School of Medicine, United States.

Funding

Research and Evaluation Support Core Unit (RESCU Core)P30AR072571 · NIAMS · BOSTON UNIVERSITY MEDICAL CAMPUS · PI Michael Paul Lavalley · 2019 to 2026
$6.9M
NIAMS NIH HHS P30 AR072571
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Objective: Transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation ( Design: A pilot trial in which participants received a 60-min tVNS was conducted. At baseline, immediately after, and 15 ​min after tVNS, we assessed knee pain, pressure pain threshold ( Results: 30 participants with knee OA were included, and all completed the intervention without any major side effects. Compared to baseline, knee pain was reduced by 1.27 (95 ​% CI, -1.74, -0.80) immediately after and by 1.87 (-2.33, -1.40) 15 ​min after tVNS; CPM improved by 0.11 (0.04, 0.19) and 0.07 (-0.01, 0.15); and HF improved by 213.29 (-0.38, 426.96) and 234.17 (20.49, 447.84). PPT and TS were not changed after tVNS. Conclusions: Our preliminary data demonstrated that tVNS may be a safe pain-relieving treatment for people with knee OA. Our findings suggest that improvement of knee pain might be derived from improvement of parasympathetic function and central pain mechanisms as no local therapy was applied. A large study is needed to confirm that tVNS is a novel intervention to ameliorate knee pain in people with knee OA. Clinical Trial: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05625178).

Indexed as

Central pain mechanismsHeart rate variabilityKnee osteoarthritisKnee painVagus nerve stimulation

Identifiers

PMID39687279
PMCPMC11647485

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.