4.6 Article

How to fail with paired VNS therapy

Journal

BRAIN STIMULATION
Volume 16, Issue 5, Pages 1252-1258

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.brs.2023.08.009

Keywords

Vagal nerve stimulation; Vagus nerve stimulation; Rehabilitation; Parameters; Recovery

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) is a bioelectronic therapy that has shown promise in stroke recovery and other domains. This study explores the underlying concepts of VNS therapy and examines the conditions that may affect its efficacy. The mechanisms of implanted VNS, stimulation parameters, pharmacological manipulations, accompanying comorbidities, and concurrent training are discussed in relation to the effectiveness of VNS therapy.
Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) has gained enormous traction as a promising bioelectronic therapy. In particular, the delivery of VNS paired with training to promote neural changes has demonstrated clinical success for stroke recovery and found far-reaching application in other domains, from autism to psychiatric disorders to normal learning. The success of paired VNS has been extensively documented. Here, we consider a more unusual question: why does VNS have such broad utility, and perhaps more importantly, when does VNS not work? We present a discussion of the concepts that underlie VNS therapy and an anthology of studies that describe conditions in which these concepts are violated and VNS fails. We focus specifically on the mechanisms engaged by implanted VNS, and how the parameters of stimulation, stimulation method, pharmacological manipulations, accompanying comorbidities, and specifics of concurrent training interact with these mechanisms to impact the efficacy of VNS therapy. As paired VNS therapy is increasing translated to clinical implementation, a clear understanding of the conditions in which it does, and critically, does not work is fundamental to the success of this approach.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available