| Literature DB >> 35439355 |
Sophie C Payne1,2, Glenn Ward1,3,4, James B Fallon1,2, Tomoko Hyakumura1,2, Johannes B Prins4,5,6, Sofianos Andrikopoulos6,7, Richard J MacIsaac1,3,4,6, Joel Villalobos1,2.
Abstract
Vagus nerve stimulation is emerging as a promising treatment for type 2 diabetes. Here, we evaluated the ability of stimulation of the vagus nerve to reduce glycemia in awake, freely moving metabolically compromised rats. A model of type 2 diabetes (n = 10) was induced using a high-fat diet and low doses of streptozotocin. Stimulation of the abdominal vagus nerve was achieved by pairing 15 Hz pulses on a distal pair of electrodes with high-frequency blocking stimulation (26 kHz, 4 mA) on a proximal pair of electrodes to preferentially produce efferent conducting activity (eVNS). Stimulation was well tolerated in awake, freely moving rats. During 1 h of eVNS, glycemia decreased in 90% of subjects (-1.25 ± 1.25 mM h, p = 0.017), and 2 dB above neural threshold was established as the most effective "dose" of eVNS (p = 0.009). Following 5 weeks of implantation, eVNS was still effective, resulting in significantly decreased glycemia (-1.7 ± 0.6 mM h, p = 0.003) during 1 h of eVNS. There were no overt changes in fascicle area or signs of histopathological damage observed in implanted vagal nerve tissue following chronic implantation and stimulation. Demonstration of the biocompatibility and safety of eVNS in awake, metabolically compromised animals is a critical first step to establishing this therapy for clinical use. With further development, eVNS could be a promising novel therapy for treating type 2 diabetes.Entities:
Keywords: autonomic nervous system; bioelectric medicine; directional stimulation; medical devices; metabolic disease; selective peripheral nerve stimulation
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35439355 PMCID: PMC9017977 DOI: 10.14814/phy2.15257
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Physiol Rep ISSN: 2051-817X
FIGURE 1Experimental schedule and the efferent vagus nerve stimulation strategy (eVNS). (a) Experimental schedule outlining the rat model and eVNS testing. (b) Schematic drawing of the abdominal vagus nerve cuff electrode array. The middle electrode pair (E3‐E4) provided blocking stimulation (26 kHz) and the distal electrode pair (E5‐E6) delivered an activation stimulation (15 Hz). The proximal electrode pair (E1‐E2) were used to record evoked compound action potentials (ECAPs). (c) Illustrative ECAP recordings from an acutely implanted, metabolically challenged rat (not used in this study) during no block (224 µA threshold) and during 26 kHz blocking
Summary of chronically implanted animals
| Animal ID | Implantation time (weeks) | Postoperative ECAP threshold (µA) | Final ECAP threshold (µA) | Total eVNS time (h) | Chronic Stimulation | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 24 | 7 | 420 | Not tested | 18 | Yes | Dorsal connector lost on week 4 |
| 26 | 7 | 320 | 500 | 27 | Yes | |
| 27 | 7 | Invalid | Invalid | 6 | No | Shorted electrodes |
| 30 | 6 | None | None | 3 | No | Nerve slipped from electrode cuff |
| 32 | 6 | None | None | 13 | Yes | |
| 33 | 5 | 400 | 710 | 20 | Yes | |
| 34 | 5 | 450 | 500 | 20 | Yes | |
| 35 | 4 | 400 | 500 | 14 | Yes | |
| 36 | 5 | None | None | 18 | Yes | |
| 39 | 4 | 480 | 1,000 | 15 | Yes | Infection around dorsal connector |
FIGURE 2Dose effects of acute eVNS during an oral glucose tolerance test. (a) Representative example shows a reduction (indicated by blue shading) in glycemia during 2 dB eVNS (1 h, blue line) compared to control (no stimulation, dotted black line). (b) Changes in the area under the curve (AUC) of glycemia during acute eVNS compared to internal unstimulated control. (c) Changes in glycemia AUC when different current levels above ECAP threshold were applied. Data were compared to the control glycemic response within the same animal and show the difference in glycemia from baseline (T = 0). Data in (b,c) show mean ± SEM, symbols are individual subject values, and significance was accepted as values p < 0.05 (indicated by “*”)
FIGURE 3Chronic stability of eVNS during an oral glucose tolerance test following chronic implantation. (a) Average net changes in glucose (n = 6), compared to baseline, during 60 min of 2 dB eVNS and no stimulation (control). (b) Comparison of the glycemic AUC during 1 h of eVNS and no stimulation (control). (c) Comparison of the insulin AUC during eVNS and no stimulation (control). (d) Comparison of the glucagon AUC during eVNS and no stimulation (control). Data in (b–d) show AUC of the change from baseline (T = 0). Graphs show mean ± SEM, symbols represent individual subject values, and significance was accepted as values p < 0.05 (indicated by ‘*’)
FIGURE 4Histological assessment of the vagus nerve following chronic stimulation and implantation. Hematoxylin and eosin staining was used to assess histopathology in neural tissue proximal (a) to the implant, at E1‐E2 (b), E3‐E4 (c), and E5‐E6 (d). (e) The cross‐sectional area of anterior vagus nerve fascicles was analyzed proximal to the implantation site and in tissue adjacent to electrode pairs. Scale bar for (a–d) represents 100 µm and data show mean ± SEM, with significance accepted as values p < 0.05