Significant vomiting and weight loss in a pediatric epilepsy patient secondary to vagus nerve stimulation: A case report and review of the literature
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Vagus nerve stimulation is a neuromodulatory treatment option for individuals with drug resistant epilepsy who are not resective surgical candidates. As the vagus nerve has widespread neural connections, stimulation can lead to an array of adverse effects. While vomiting and weight loss are known side effects of vagus nerve stimulation, these are typically transient, mild, and do not limit the ability to continue treatment. We describe a 17-year-old female with drug resistant focal epilepsy secondary to tuberous sclerosis complex, who began to experience daily emesis and significant weight loss approximately 2.5 years after VNS device insertion. Her body mass index progressively fell from between the 75th-85th percentiles to less than the first percentile. She underwent extensive workup by neurology, gastroenterology, and adolescent medicine services with no obvious cause identified. Prior to the insertion of an enteral tube for feeding support and urgent weight restoration, her vagus nerve stimulator was switched off, resulting in immediate cessation of her vomiting and a dramatically rapid recovery of weight over the ensuing few months. This case emphasizes the need to consider adverse effects of vagus nerve stimulation in the differential diagnosis of patients with otherwise unexplained new medical sequelae, and provides evidence potentially linking vagal stimulation to significant malnutrition-related complications. Outside of GI-related effects, few studies have shown late-onset adverse effects from VNS, including laryngeal and facial pain as well as bradyarrhythmia. Further research is needed to elucidate the exact mechanisms of vagus nerve stimulation to better anticipate and mitigate adverse effects, and to understand the pathophysiology of late-onset adverse effects in previously tolerant VNS patients.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".