ReviewJournal of arrhythmia2026
Artificial Intelligence Techniques in Cardiac Neuromodulation: Mechanisms, Applications, and Pathways to Clinical Translation.
Review in Journal of arrhythmia, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Cardiac neuromodulation includes various methods, such as vagus nerve stimulation, baroreflex activation therapy, renal denervation, and stellate ganglion intervention, and targets the autonomic imbalance contributing to the pathophysiology of many cardiovascular diseases. Despite promising mechanistic evidence, several landmark trials, including INOVATE-HF, NECTAR-HF, and SYMPLICITY HTN-3, did not meet their primary clinical outcomes, with substantial numbers of non-responders observed across therapies. Variation in patient response is attributed to several unresolved issues, including insufficient stimulation dosing, off-target or non-selective fiber activation, and differences in autonomic phenotypes between patients. Both problems highlight the need for individualized approaches to patient selection, therapy delivery, and monitoring. Artificial intelligence (AI) offers tools to address these problems. In this narrative review, we describe seven families of AI techniques relevant to cardiac neuromodulation: supervised machine learning, deep learning, representation learning, reinforcement learning, multimodal fusion, digital twins with physics-informed AI, and explainable AI with federated learning. For each family, we summarize how the method works, the cardiac neuromodulation problem it addresses, and the available evidence in the field of cardiac electrophysiology. We then map these techniques to the three core problems of patient selection, real-time stimulation control, and longitudinal response monitoring. The strongest evidence to date supports representation learning for VNS responder identification, reinforcement learning for closed-loop VNS control, and digital twins for in silico testing of stimulation protocols. The opportunity for the field is to translate these methods, most of which were developed in adjacent fields, into prospective cardiac neuromodulation trials.
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.