Acute Cardiovascular Responses to Vagus Nerve Stimulation after Experimental Spinal Cord Injury
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Pairing vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) with rehabilitation has emerged as a potential strategy to enhance plasticity and improve recovery in a range of neurological disorders. A recent study highlights the therapeutic promise of VNS in promoting motor recovery after spinal cord injury (SCI). We investigated the safety of acute VNS in a rat model of chronic SCI. We measured the cardiovascular response to various VNS paradigms following chronic high-thoracic SCI that is known to deleteriously impact cardiovascular control. Dose-response experiments with continuous VNS revealed an SCI-dependent increase in sensitivity for heart rate (HR) and blood pressure (BP) compared with controls. A clinically relevant intermittent VNS resulted in transient reduction in HR in rats with SCI; however, BP remained unaltered. In all experiments, the effect lasted only while the VNS stimulus train was present, as HR and BP restored to baseline values as soon as VNS ended. No prolonged episodes of persisting hypotension were seen in either group. Further, VNS did not trigger autonomic dysreflexia or exacerbate the severity of autonomic dysreflexia when induced during or after stimulation sessions. Overall, these findings provide initial evidence that intermittent VNS at parameters used for targeted plasticity therapy (30 Hz, 0.8 mA) appears safe and supports further investigation of this potential therapy for use following SCI.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".