Display options
Cite
Muzquiz MI, Richardson L, Vetter C, et al. In-vivo application of low frequency alternating currents on porcine cervical vagus nerve evokes reversible nerve conduction block. Bioelectron Med. 2021;7(1):9doi: 10.1186/s42234-021-00072-w.
Muzquiz, M. I., Richardson, L., Vetter, C., Smolik, M., Alhawwash, A., Goodwill, A., Bashirullah, R., Carr, M., & Yoshida, K. (2021). In-vivo application of low frequency alternating currents on porcine cervical vagus nerve evokes reversible nerve conduction block. Bioelectronic medicine, 7(1), 9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s42234-021-00072-w
Muzquiz, Maria Ivette, et al. "In-vivo application of low frequency alternating currents on porcine cervical vagus nerve evokes reversible nerve conduction block." Bioelectronic medicine vol. 7,1 (2021): 9. doi: https://doi.org/10.1186/s42234-021-00072-w
Muzquiz MI, Richardson L, Vetter C, Smolik M, Alhawwash A, Goodwill A, Bashirullah R, Carr M, Yoshida K. In-vivo application of low frequency alternating currents on porcine cervical vagus nerve evokes reversible nerve conduction block. Bioelectron Med. 2021 Jun 30;7(1):9. doi: 10.1186/s42234-021-00072-w. PMID: 34187586; PMCID: PMC8243469.
Copy Download .nbib Format: NLM
Share it on

Bioelectron Med. 2021 Jun 30;7(1):9. doi: 10.1186/s42234-021-00072-w.

In-vivo application of low frequency alternating currents on porcine cervical vagus nerve evokes reversible nerve conduction block.

Bioelectronic medicine

Maria Ivette Muzquiz, Lindsay Richardson, Christian Vetter, Macallister Smolik, Awadh Alhawwash, Adam Goodwill, Rizwan Bashirullah, Michael Carr, Ken Yoshida

Affiliations

  1. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Indiana University - Purdue University Indianapolis, Indianapolis, USA. [email protected].
  2. Department of Biomedical Engineering, Indiana University - Purdue University Indianapolis, Indianapolis, USA.
  3. Department of Biology, Indiana University - Purdue University Indianapolis, Indianapolis, USA.
  4. Weldon School of Biomedical Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, USA.
  5. Biomedical Technology Department, King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia.
  6. Department of Anatomy, Cell Biology, and Physiology, Indiana University School of Medicine, Indianapolis, USA.
  7. Galvani Bioelectronics, Glaxo Smith Kline, GSK, King of Prussia, USA.

PMID: 34187586 PMCID: PMC8243469 DOI: 10.1186/s42234-021-00072-w

Abstract

BACKGROUND: This paper describes a method to reversibly block nerve conduction through direct application of a 1 Hz sinusoidal current waveform delivered through a bipolar nerve cuff electrode. This low frequency alternating current (LFAC) waveform was previously shown to reversibly block the effects of vagal pulse stimulation evoked bradycardia in-vivo in the anaesthetised rat model (Mintch et al. 2019). The present work measured the effectiveness of LFAC block on larger caliber myelinated vagal afferent fibers in human sized nerve bundles projecting to changes in breathing rate mediated by the Hering-Breuer (HB) reflex in anaesthetized domestic swine (n=5).

METHODS: Two bipolar cuff electrodes were implanted unilaterally to the left cervical vagus nerve, which was crushed caudal to the electrodes to eliminate cardiac effects. A tripolar recording cuff electrode was placed rostral to the bipolar stimulating electrodes on the same nerve to measure changes in the compound nerve action potentials (CNAP) elicited by the vagal pulse stimulation and conditioned by the LFAC waveform. Standard pulse stimulation was applied at a sufficient level to induce a reduction in breathing rate through the HB reflex. If unblocked, the HB reflex would cause breathing to slow down and potentially halt completely. Block was quantified by the ability of LFAC to reduce the effect of the HB reflex by monitoring the respiration rate during LFAC alone, LFAC and vagal stimulation, and vagal stimulation alone.

RESULTS: LFAC achieved 87.2 ±8.8% block (n=5) at current levels of 1.1 ±0.3 mA

CONCLUSION: These novel findings suggest that LFAC is a potential alternative or complementary method to other electrical blocking techniques in clinical applications.

Keywords: Conduction block; Low frequency alternating current block; Nerve block; Neuromodulation

References

  1. J Appl Physiol Respir Environ Exerc Physiol. 1977 Mar;42(3):461-5 - PubMed
  2. Annu Rev Biomed Eng. 2008;10:275-309 - PubMed
  3. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2004 May;42(3):394-406 - PubMed
  4. J Neural Eng. 2020 Mar 09;17(2):026005 - PubMed
  5. Sci Rep. 2021 Mar 3;11(1):5077 - PubMed
  6. Brain Stimul. 2020 Nov - Dec;13(6):1617-1630 - PubMed
  7. Obes Surg. 2017 Jan;27(1):177-185 - PubMed
  8. Br J Anaesth. 1975 Nov;47(11):1123-33 - PubMed
  9. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 1995 Jul;152(1):217-24 - PubMed
  10. Respirology. 2003 Sep;8(3):291-301 - PubMed
  11. Muscle Nerve. 2005 Dec;32(6):782-90 - PubMed
  12. IEEE Trans Neural Syst Rehabil Eng. 2004 Sep;12(3):313-24 - PubMed
  13. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 1991 Feb;38(2):168-74 - PubMed
  14. Med Biol Eng Comput. 2011 Feb;49(2):241-51 - PubMed
  15. J Neural Eng. 2014 Oct;11(5):056012 - PubMed
  16. J Neurophysiol. 2015 Jun 1;113(10):3923-9 - PubMed
  17. Sci Rep. 2020 Jun 8;10(1):9221 - PubMed
  18. Bioelectron Med (Lond). 2018 Jan;1(1):21-27 - PubMed
  19. J Neural Eng. 2018 Jan 08;15(1):016012 - PubMed
  20. J Neural Eng. 2007 Sep;4(3):205-12 - PubMed
  21. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng. 1991 Feb;38(2):175-9 - PubMed
  22. Neuromodulation. 2014 Apr;17(3):242-54; discussion 254-5 - PubMed
  23. Respir Physiol. 1970 Mar;8(3):376-84 - PubMed
  24. J Neural Eng. 2007 Dec;4(4):390-8 - PubMed
  25. J Neural Eng. 2006 Jun;3(2):180-7 - PubMed
  26. Med Biol Eng Comput. 1991 Sep;29(5):543-7 - PubMed
  27. Acta Neurobiol Exp (Wars). 1973;33(1):89-96 - PubMed
  28. Cell. 2015 Apr 23;161(3):622-633 - PubMed
  29. Bioelectron Med (Lond). 2018 Jan;1(1):39-54 - PubMed
  30. Annu Int Conf IEEE Eng Med Biol Soc. 2009;2009:614-7 - PubMed

Publication Types

Grant support