ReviewJournal of neuroimaging : official journal of the American Society of Neuroimaging
Assessing a Stimulator Modification for Simultaneous Noninvasive Auricular Vagus Nerve Stimulation and MRI.
Review in Journal of neuroimaging : official journal of the American Society of Neuroimaging. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation: mechanisms, applications, and research progress.Frontiers in neuroscience · 2026Review
- Assessing a Stimulator Modification for Simultaneous Noninvasive Auricular Vagus Nerve Stimulation and MRI.Journal of neuroimaging : official journal of the American Society of NeuroimagingReview
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
18 authors.
Funding
Abstract
background and purposeThe vagus nerve can be stimulated noninvasively at the ear using transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS). Concurrent functional MRI (fMRI) permits study of taVNS-induced changes in brain dynamics, a key requisite for precision neurostimulation. However, there is no standardized protocol for how to safely apply taVNS during MRI. One major risk is temperature increase exceeding innocuous thresholds due to coupling of the emitted radio frequency (RF) pulse during imaging. Thus, we developed and tested a stimulator cable configuration with floating ground cable traps and filter plate connectors.
methodsWe measured temperature, resonance of the stimulation electrodes, and current interference using unmodified and modified stimulation cables. Measurements were conducted across three sites using different 3T MRI scanner models, stimulators, and stimulation strengths with phantoms and human participants.
resultsThe modified compared to the unmodified cable considerably reduced RF heating as the relative temperature increase stayed well below the 2 K threshold specified by the ASTM F2182 standard. Additionally, in accordance with ASTM 2119, we can rule out potential distortion and signal loss around the electrodes due to current flow from the stimulator and demonstrate that impaired image quality in brainstem and midbrain regions is recovered using the modified cable.
conclusionsWe show that adding floating ground cable traps to the stimulator cable allows the safe use of taVNS with fMRI and may improve image quality in functional imaging. To enable other researchers to modify their hardware in the same way, we provide details of the modifications.
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.