ArticleAPL bioengineering2026
Computational modeling of human vagus nerve stimulation with three-dimensional fascicular morphology.
Article in APL bioengineering, 2026. 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.
- Sacral Neuromodulation for Refractory Overactive Bladder: Closing the Gaps in Anatomy, Mechanisms, and Parameter Selection.Advances in therapy · 2026Review
- Artificial Intelligence Techniques in Cardiac Neuromodulation: Mechanisms, Applications, and Pathways to Clinical Translation.Journal of arrhythmia · 2026Review
- Modulated high-frequency stimulation enables precisely timed, selective nerve block.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Computational modeling of human vagus nerve stimulation with three-dimensional fascicular morphology.APL bioengineering · 2026Article
- Automated 3D segmentation of human vagus nerve fascicles and epineurium from micro-computed tomography images using anatomy-aware neural networks.Journal of neural engineering · 2026Article
- The human vagal complex: from gross anatomy to single neurons, from brainstem to abdomen.Research square · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Implanted vagus nerve stimulation is FDA-approved to treat epilepsy, depression, and stroke sequelae and is under development for other disorders such as heart failure and rheumatoid arthritis. Anatomically realistic computational models enable the design of electrodes and stimulation parameters that activate nerve fibers that mediate therapeutic responses, and avoid activating fibers that cause side effects. Conventional modeling techniques assume constant longitudinal morphology, extruding a single cross section to define the three-dimensional nerve geometry. However, recent imaging data showed that human vagus nerves have extensive fascicle splitting and merging along their length. Therefore, we developed a pipeline to simulate true three-dimensional (true-3D) models of peripheral nerve stimulation from segmentations of micro-computed tomography imaging. We implemented models of n = 4 human vagus nerves and systematically evaluated extrusion vs true-3D model responses to electrical stimulation across population dose-response relationships, fiber-specific thresholds, recruitment order, and spatial selectivity. Despite the complex morphology of the human vagus nerve, extrusion models replicated the true-3D neural responses if: (1) the nerve morphology was deformed to a circular cross section, as occurs with chronic cuff implants, and (2) the extruded cross section was centered under the depolarizing electrode contact. Our pipeline provides a foundation for advanced modeling of peripheral nerve stimulation and the design of more selective stimulation therapies.
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.