Transcutaneous Vagus Nerve Stimulation is Associated with Lower Mechanical Ventilation and Mortality in COVID-19 Patients: An interim Safety Analysis

P. Nemechek
{"title":"Transcutaneous Vagus Nerve Stimulation is Associated with Lower Mechanical Ventilation and Mortality in COVID-19 Patients: An interim Safety Analysis","authors":"P. Nemechek","doi":"10.33140/jcei.05.06.02","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Objective: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation in preventing respiratory failure and improving survival in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Design, Setting, and Participants: Interim analysis of an ongoing single-arm, uncontrolled open-label, observational trial to assess the transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation (tVNS) in hospitalized SARS-CoV-2 infected subjects. Eligible subjects are 18 years old or older requiring hospitalization for COVID-19pneumonia. Results: The 25 subjects enrolled with a mean age of 52.2 (22-80). Mechanical ventilation was required in only 2 (8%) cases. One survived and 1 one died. Although 4 (16%) of the 25 hospitalized subjects died, only 1 (4%) was attributed to respiratory failure. Relative to other reported COVID-19 hospitalization outcomes data, our mortality rate of 16% (4 of 25) is lower than many other reported cohorts 10.2% – 50%. Only 8% (2 of 25) of subjects required mechanical ventilation comparing favorably to 7.4%-79% of subjects requiring mechanical ventilation in other cohorts. Adverse events associated with tVNS occurred in only 2 subjects (8%) and consisted of reversible oral paresthesia and orthostatic hypotension. Conclusion and Relevance: In this interim report of tVNS in COVID-19 pneumonia, patients had a low rate of adverse events, infrequent use of mechanical ventilation, and a high rate of survival. Several other studies have shown a wide range of in hospital mortality (14-50%) and the requirement of mechanical ventilation (7-79%). The interim analysis found the mortality rate and the frequency of mechanical ventilation to be less than almost all other large COVID-19 cohorts. Only mild and self-limiting adverse events tVNS occurred in 2 subjects highlighting the safety of vagus stimulation. The study is slated to enroll a minimum of 50 subjects. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NTC04379037.","PeriodicalId":73657,"journal":{"name":"Journal of clinical & experimental immunology","volume":"24 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-11-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of clinical & experimental immunology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33140/jcei.05.06.02","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Objective: To evaluate the safety and efficacy of transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation in preventing respiratory failure and improving survival in hospitalized COVID-19 patients. Design, Setting, and Participants: Interim analysis of an ongoing single-arm, uncontrolled open-label, observational trial to assess the transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation (tVNS) in hospitalized SARS-CoV-2 infected subjects. Eligible subjects are 18 years old or older requiring hospitalization for COVID-19pneumonia. Results: The 25 subjects enrolled with a mean age of 52.2 (22-80). Mechanical ventilation was required in only 2 (8%) cases. One survived and 1 one died. Although 4 (16%) of the 25 hospitalized subjects died, only 1 (4%) was attributed to respiratory failure. Relative to other reported COVID-19 hospitalization outcomes data, our mortality rate of 16% (4 of 25) is lower than many other reported cohorts 10.2% – 50%. Only 8% (2 of 25) of subjects required mechanical ventilation comparing favorably to 7.4%-79% of subjects requiring mechanical ventilation in other cohorts. Adverse events associated with tVNS occurred in only 2 subjects (8%) and consisted of reversible oral paresthesia and orthostatic hypotension. Conclusion and Relevance: In this interim report of tVNS in COVID-19 pneumonia, patients had a low rate of adverse events, infrequent use of mechanical ventilation, and a high rate of survival. Several other studies have shown a wide range of in hospital mortality (14-50%) and the requirement of mechanical ventilation (7-79%). The interim analysis found the mortality rate and the frequency of mechanical ventilation to be less than almost all other large COVID-19 cohorts. Only mild and self-limiting adverse events tVNS occurred in 2 subjects highlighting the safety of vagus stimulation. The study is slated to enroll a minimum of 50 subjects. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NTC04379037.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
经皮迷走神经刺激与COVID-19患者低机械通气和死亡率相关:一项临时安全性分析
目的:评价经皮迷走神经刺激预防新冠肺炎住院患者呼吸衰竭和提高生存率的安全性和有效性。设计、环境和参与者:一项正在进行的单臂、非对照、开放标签、观察性试验的中期分析,以评估住院SARS-CoV-2感染受试者的经皮迷走神经刺激(tVNS)。符合条件的受试者为18岁或以上,因covid -19肺炎需要住院治疗。结果:入组25例受试者,平均年龄52.2岁(22-80岁)。只有2例(8%)患者需要机械通气。1人幸存,1人死亡。虽然25名住院患者中有4人(16%)死亡,但只有1人(4%)死于呼吸衰竭。相对于其他报道的COVID-19住院结局数据,我们的死亡率为16%(25人中有4人)低于许多其他报道的队列10.2% - 50%。只有8%的受试者(25人中有2人)需要机械通气,而在其他队列中需要机械通气的受试者为7.4%-79%。与tVNS相关的不良事件仅发生在2名受试者中(8%),包括可逆性口腔感觉异常和直立性低血压。结论及意义:在本中期报告中,COVID-19肺炎患者的tVNS不良事件发生率低,机械通气使用频率低,生存率高。其他几项研究表明,住院死亡率(14-50%)和机械通气需求(7-79%)的差异很大。中期分析发现,死亡率和机械通气频率低于几乎所有其他大型COVID-19队列。只有2例受试者出现轻度和自限性的tVNS不良反应,突出了迷走神经刺激的安全性。该研究计划招募至少50名受试者。试验注册:ClinicalTrials.gov标识符:NTC04379037。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Other Sea Star Igkappa Gene Cloning Assay in E.Coli with New Parameters Australian COVID-19 pandemic: A Bradford Hill Analysis of Iatrogenic Excess Mortality Nutritional Management of Celiac Disease Cinnamein Inhibits the Induction of Nitric Oxide and Proinflammatory Cytokines in Macrophages, Microglia and Astrocytes. Therapeutic Monoclonal Antibodies Approved by FDA in 2022
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1