4.3 Article

The Use of Non-invasive Vagus Nerve Stimulation to Treat Respiratory Symptoms Associated With COVID-19: A Theoretical Hypothesis and Early Clinical Experience

期刊

NEUROMODULATION
卷 23, 期 6, 页码 784-788

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1111/ner.13172

关键词

Cholinergic anti-inflammatory pathway; COVID-19; cytokine storm; neuromodulation; non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation; respiratory symptoms

资金

  1. electroCore, Inc.

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objectives Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is a pandemic with no specific therapeutic agents and substantial mortality, and finding new treatments is critical. Most cases are mild, but a significant minority of patients develop moderate to severe respiratory symptoms, with the most severe cases requiring intensive care and/or ventilator support. This respiratory compromise appears to be due to a hyperimmune reaction, often called a cytokine storm. Vagus nerve stimulation has been demonstrated to block production of cytokines in sepsis and other medical conditions. We hypothesize that non-invasive vagus nerve stimulation (nVNS) might provide clinical benefits in patients with respiratory symptoms similar to those associated with COVID-19. Materials and Methods Information on two case reports was obtained via email correspondence and phone interviews with the patients. Results Both patients reported clinically meaningful benefits from nVNS therapy. In case 1, the patient used nVNS to expedite symptomatic recovery at home after hospital discharge and was able to discontinue use of opioid and cough suppressant medications. In case 2, the patient experienced immediate and consistent relief from symptoms of chest tightness and shortness of breath, as well as an improved ability to clear his lungs. Conclusions Preliminary observations and a strong scientific foundation suggest that nVNS might provide clinical benefits in patients with COVID-19 via multiple mechanisms.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据