4.6 Article

Non-invasive Vagus Nerve Stimulation in Healthy Humans Reduces Sympathetic Nerve Activity

期刊

BRAIN STIMULATION
卷 7, 期 6, 页码 871-877

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.brs.2014.07.031

关键词

Vagus nerve stimulation; Sympathetic nervous system; Neuromodulation

资金

  1. University of Leeds

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) is currently used to treat refractory epilepsy and is being investigated as a potential therapy for a range of conditions, including heart failure, tinnitus, obesity and Alzheimer's disease. However, the invasive nature and expense limits the use of VNS in patient populations and hinders the exploration of the mechanisms involved. Objective: We investigated a non-invasive method of VNS through electrical stimulation of the auricular branch of the vagus nerve distributed to the skin of the ear - transcutaneous VNS (tVNS) and measured the autonomic effects. Methods: The effects of tVNS parameters on autonomic function in 48 healthy participants were investigated using heart rate variability (HRV) and microneurography. tVNS was performed using a transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) machine and modified surface electrodes. Participants visited the laboratory once and received either active (200 mu s, 30 Hz; n = 34) or sham (n = 14) stimulation. Results: Active tVNS significantly increased HRV in healthy participants (P = 0.026) indicating a shift in cardiac autonomic function toward parasympathetic predominance. Microneurographic recordings revealed a significant decrease in frequency (P = 0.0001) and incidence (P = 0.0002) of muscle sympathetic nerve activity during tVNS. Conclusion: tVNS can increase HRV and reduce sympathetic nerve outflow, which is desirable in conditions characterized by enhanced sympathetic nerve activity, such as heart failure. tVNS can therefore influence human physiology and provide a simple and inexpensive alternative to invasive VNS. (C) 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.6
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