MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3002452051 · doi:10.14814/phy2.14321

Chronic vagal nerve stimulation has no effect on tachycardia‐induced heart failure progression or excitation–contraction coupling

2020· article· en· W3002452051 on OpenAlexfundno aff
Emma J. Radcliffe, Charles M. Pearman, Amy Watkins, Michael Lawless, Graeme Kirkwood, Sophie N. Saxton, David Eisner, Andrew W. Trafford

Bibliographic record

VenuePhysiological Reports · 2020
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicVagus Nerve Stimulation Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMedical Research CouncilMedical Research Council CanadaBritish Heart FoundationNational Institute for Health and Care ResearchLivaNovaMedtronic
KeywordsVagus nerve stimulationHeart failureMedicineStimulationInternal medicineHeart rateCalciumContraction (grammar)TachycardiaHeart diseaseCardiologyVagus nerveBlood pressure

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Autonomic dysregulation plays a key role in the development and progression of heart failure (HF). Vagal nerve stimulation (VNS) may be a promising therapeutic approach. However, the outcomes from clinical trials evaluating VNS in HF have been mixed, and the mechanisms underlying this treatment remain poorly understood. Intermittent high-frequency VNS (pulse width 300 µs, 30 Hz stimulation, 30 s on, and 300 s off) was used in healthy sheep and sheep in which established HF had been induced by 4 weeks rapid ventricular pacing to assess (a) the effects of VNS on intrinsic cardiac vagal tone, (b) whether VNS delays the progression of established HF, and (c) whether high-frequency VNS affects the regulation of cardiomyocyte calcium handling in health and disease. VNS had no effect on resting heart rate or intrinsic vagal tone in the healthy heart. Although fewer VNS-treated animals showed subjective signs of heart failure at 6 weeks, overall VNS did not slow the progression of clinical or echocardiographic signs of HF. Chronic VNS did not affect left ventricular cardiomyocyte calcium handling in healthy sheep. Rapid ventricular pacing decreased the L-type calcium current and calcium transient amplitude, but chronic VNS did not rescue dysfunctional calcium handling. Overall, high-frequency VNS did not prevent progression of established HF or influence cellular excitation-contraction coupling. However, a different model of HF or selection of different stimulation parameters may have yielded different results. These results highlight the need for greater insight into VNS dosing and parameter selection and a deeper understanding of its physiological effects.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.010
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMetaresearch
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.372
Threshold uncertainty score0.998

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.010
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.135
GPT teacher head0.390
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations5
Published2020
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuePhysiological ReportsSame topicVagus Nerve Stimulation ResearchFrench-language works237,207