RT Journal Article
SR Electronic
T1 Auricular Vagus Neuromodulation – A Systematic Review on Quality of Evidence and Clinical Effects
JF medRxiv
FD Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press
SP 2020.11.26.20239509
DO 10.1101/2020.11.26.20239509
A1 Verma, Nishant
A1 Mudge, Jonah D
A1 Kasole, Maïsha S E
A1 Chen, Rex C
A1 Blanz, Stephan L
A1 Trevathan, James K
A1 Ludwig, Kip A
YR 2020
UL http://medrxiv.org/content/early/2020/11/30/2020.11.26.20239509.abstract
AB Background The auricular branch of the vagus runs superficial to the surface of the skin, making it a favorable target for non-invasive techniques to modulate vagal activity. For this reason, there have been many early-stage clinical trials on a diverse range of conditions. Unfortunately, often with conflicting results.Methods To investigate the conflicting results, we conducted a systematic review of auricular vagus nerve stimulation (aVNS) randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using the established Cochrane Risk of Bias tool as a framework. The Risk of Bias tool is intended to identify deviations from an ideal RCT that may cause the effect of an intervention to be overestimated or underestimated. As is common for early-stage studies, the majority of aVNS studies were assessed as having ‘some’ or ‘high’ risk of bias, which makes interpreting their results in a broader context problematic.Results The reported trial outcomes were qualitatively synthesized across studies. There is evidence of a modest decrease in HR during higher stimulation current amplitudes. Findings on heart rate variability (HRV) conflicted between studies and were hindered by trial design including inappropriate washout periods and multiple methods used to quantify HRV. There is early-stage evidence to suggest aVNS may reduce circulating levels or endotoxin induced levels of inflammatory markers. Studies on epilepsy reached primary endpoints similar to previous RCTs on implantable VNS, albeit with concerns over quality of blinding. aVNS showed preliminary evidence of ameliorating pathological pain but not induced pain.Discussion Drawing on the fundamentals of neuromodulation, we establish the need for direct measures of neural target engagement in aVNS. Firstly, for the optimization of electrode design, placement, and stimulation waveform parameters to improve on-target engagement and minimize off-target engagement. Secondly, direct measures of target engagement, along with consistent evaluation of the double blind, must be used to improve the design of controls in the long term - a major source of concern identified in the Cochrane analysis. Lastly, we list common improvements for the reporting of results that can be addressed in the short term.Conclusion The need for direct measures of neural target engagement and consistent evaluation of the double blind is applicable to other paresthesia-inducing neuromodulation therapies and their control designs. We intend for this review to contribute to the successful translation of neuromodulation therapies such as aVNS.Competing Interest StatementKAL has received research contracts from LivaNova in the past.Funding StatementThe work presented here was funded by the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency Biological Technologies Office (BTO) program title Targeted Neuroplasticity Training (TNT) under the auspices of Doug Weber and Tristan McClure-Begley through the Space and Naval Warfare Systems Command Pacific with grants no. N66001-17-2-4010.Author DeclarationsI confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.YesThe details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:Not applicable for systematic review.All necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived.YesI understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).YesI have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines and uploaded the relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material as supplementary files, if applicable.YesNot applicable.