| Literature DB >> 35600632 |
Albertyna Osińska1, Andrzej Rynkiewicz1, Marek Binder2, Tomasz Komendziński3, Anna Borowicz3, Antoni Leszczyński3.
Abstract
Neuromodulatory electroceuticals such as vagus nerve stimulation have been recently gaining traction as potential rehabilitation tools for disorders of consciousness (DoC). We present a longitudinal case study of non-invasive auricular vagus nerve stimulation (taVNS) in a patient diagnosed with chronic unresponsive wakefulness syndrome (previously known as vegetative state). Over a period of 6 months we applied taVNS daily and regularly evaluated the patient's behavioral outcomes using Coma Recovery Scale - Revised. We also took electrophysiological measures: resting state electroencephalography (EEG), heart rate (HR) and heart rate variability (HRV). All these methods revealed signs of improvement in the patient's condition. The total CRS-R scores fluctuated but rose from 4 and 6 at initial stages to the heights of 12 and 13 in the 3rd and 5th month, which would warrant a change in diagnosis to a Minimally Conscious State. Scores obtained in a 2 months follow-up period, though, suggest this may not have been a lasting improvement. Behavioral signs of recovery are triangulated by EEG frequency spectrum profiles with re-emergence of a second oscillatory peak in the alpha range, which has been shown to characterize aware people. However, sustained spontaneous theta oscillations did not predictably diminish, which most likely reflects structural brain damage. ECG measures revealed a steady decrease in pre-stimulation HR combined with an increase in HRV-HR. This suggests a gradual withdrawal of sympathetic and an increase in parasympathetic control of the heart, which the previous literature has also linked with DoC improvements. Together, this study suggests that taVNS stimulation holds promise as a DoC treatment.Entities:
Keywords: EEG; HRV; coma; disorders of consciousness; taVNS; unresponsive wakefulness syndrome (UWS); vagus nerve stimulation
Year: 2022 PMID: 35600632 PMCID: PMC9120963 DOI: 10.3389/fnins.2022.834507
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Neurosci ISSN: 1662-453X Impact factor: 5.152
A summary of VNS and tVNS studies on DoC patients.
| Participants and diagnoses | Time since injury | Stimulation site and device | Stimulation parameters | Stimulation protocol | Assessment | Outcomes | |
|
| |||||||
|
| 1 UWS | 15 years | Neck level, Cyberonics Inc. | 0.25 mA/30 Hz/500 μs; gradually increased to 1.5 mA | 30 s stimulation by 5 min rest | CRS-R, EEG, PET | CRS-R: 5 → 10 (but not sustained) |
|
| 10 MCS | 7.16 ± 2.12 months | G112, PINS Medical, Ltd. | 0.1–0.3 mA/20–30 Hz/250 or 500 μs, gradually increased to 1.5 mA, then individual adjustments up to 3.5 mA | 30 s stimulation by 5 min rest | CRS-R | 1 month: no sig. total scores vs. baseline |
|
| |||||||
|
| 1 UWS | 50 days | Cymba concha (bilateral) | 4–6 mA/20 Hz/<1,000 μs | Twice daily, for 30 min | CRS-R, fMRI | CRS-R baseline 6, at 4 weeks: 13, change UWS → MCS; new behaviors in motor and oromotor function |
|
| 6 UWS | 12.1 ± 6.4 months | Left tragus | 1.5 mA/20 Hz/250 μs | 30-min twice a day, 5 days a week | CRS-R | Responders (showing improvement in at least one item in CRS-R): |
|
| 3 UWS | Median: 41 days | Cymba concha | 0.5 mA for the first 3 days, then 1 mA/25 Hz/250 μs | 4 h daily, 30 s on/30 s off | CRS-R | 3/5 patients showed improvement (>3 points); of these: |
|
| 7 UWS | 78.5 ± 83.3 | Cymba concha and cavity concha | 4–6 mA/20 Hz/500 μs | 30 min continuously, twice daily | CRS-R, GOS, fMRI | CRS-R: |
CBF, cerebral blood flow; CRS-R, coma recovery scale-revisited; DMN, default mode network; EMCS, emergence of minimal conscious state; FC, functional connectivity; GOS, Glasgow Outcome Scale; MCS, minimal conscious state; UWS, unresponsive wakefulness syndrome, fMRI, functional magnetic resonance imaging; Hz, Hertz; mA, milliamperes; μs, microseconds; s, seconds; PET, positron emission tomography; taVNS, transcutaneous auricular vagus nerve stimulation (non-invasive, via an electrode attached to the ear); vmPFC, ventromedial prefrontal cortex; VNS, vagus nerve stimulation (via a surgically inserted implant); wSMI, weighted symbolic mutual information.
Chronological information about subsequent EEG measurements.
| Measurement ID | Relative day |
| EEG 1 | 10 |
| EEG 2 | 66 |
| EEG 3 | 95 |
| EEG 4 | 131 |
| EEG 5 | 192 |
| EEG 6 | 248 |
The days are calculated relative to the day when the stimulation protocol was started.
FIGURE 1The CRS-R total scores over the study duration. Solid line is the best fitted non-linear regression curve (r2 = 0.36, p < 0.01). Vertical dashed line indicates the day of the last taVNS session.
The detailed information about the MaxPeak1 and MaxPeak2.
| Meas. ID | MaxPeak1 center frequency (Hz) | MaxPeak1 amplitude (μV2) | MaxPeak2 center frequency (Hz) | MaxPeak2 amplitude (μV2) |
| Error estim. |
| EEG 1 | 6.24 | 0.70 | Not found | Not found | 0.9923 | 0.0411 |
| EEG 2 | 6.41 | 0.79 | 8.99 | 0.53 | 0.9985 | 0.0222 |
| EEG 3 | 6.50 | 0.73 | 9.12 | 0.28 | 0.9903 | 0.0498 |
| EEG 4 | 6.38 | 0.53 | 9.27 | 0.34 | 0.9959 | 0.0267 |
| EEG 5 | 6.56 | 0.69 | 9.23 | 0.40 | 0.9969 | 0.0286 |
| EEG 6 | 6.11 | 0.61 | 8.72 | 0.23 | 0.9758 | 0.0640 |
FIGURE 2The spectral profiles of all six measurements from the centro-parietal channel. Black line indicates the original spectrum, the red line the fitted function obtained with FOOOF algorithm, and the blue dashed line the fitted aperiodic component.
FIGURE 3The changes of MaxPeak1 and MaxPeak2 center frequencies across all six measurements. Captions accompanying the score points indicate the center frequency score. Stimulation endpoints (red circles) indicate the first and the last day of stimulation protocol.
FIGURE 4The pre-stimulation (left panel) and post-stimulation (right panel) HR levels from all measurements during the entire program period. Solid line is the best fitted regression line (mathematical description in Table 4).
Regression coefficients for HR levels (linear regression model was used).
| Reg. coeff. |
|
| |
| Pre-stimulation level | −0.08 | 0.14 | 0.04 |
| Post-stimulation level | −0.05 | 0.09 | 0.12 |
FIGURE 5The pre-stimulation (left panel) and post-stimulation (right panel) HRV-HF power levels from all measurements during the entire program period. Solid line is the best fitted regression line (mathematical description in Table 5).
Regression coefficients for HRV-HF levels (linear regression model was used).
| Reg. coeff. |
|
| |
| Pre-stimulation level | 3.22 | 0.28 | 0.002 |
| Post-stimulation level | 1.36 | 0.35 | 0.001 |