Pervaz Ipek, Thurn Lilly, Vezzani Cecilia, Kaluza Luisa, Kühnel Anne, Kroemer Nils B
Section of Medical Psychology, Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Faculty of Medicine, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Section of Medical Psychology, Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, Faculty of Medicine, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany; Department of Neurology, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Brain Stimul. 2025 Mar-Apr;18(2):148-157. doi: 10.1016/j.brs.2025.01.022. Epub 2025 Jan 28.
Transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation (tVNS) has emerged as a promising technique to modulate autonomic functions, and pupil dilation has been recognized as a promising biomarker for tVNS-induced monoaminergic release. Nevertheless, studies on the effectiveness of various tVNS protocols have produced heterogeneous results on pupil dilation to date.
Here, we synthesize the existing evidence and compare conventional ("continuous") and pulsed stimulation protocols using a Bayesian meta-analysis. To maintain a living version, we developed a Shiny App with the possibility to incorporate newly published studies in the future. Based on a systematic review, we included 18 studies (N = 771) applying either conventional or pulsed stimulation protocols.
Across studies, we found anecdotal evidence for the null hypothesis, showing that taVNS does not increase pupil size (g = 0.15, 95 % CI = [0.03, 0.27], BF = 1.0). Separating studies according to conventional vs. pulsed protocols revealed that studies using pulsed taVNS provide strong evidence for the alternative hypothesis(g = 0.36, 95 % CI = [0.19, 0.53], BF = 50.8) while conventional taVNS studies provide strong evidence for the null hypothesis (g = 0.002, CI = [-0.14, 0.14], BF = 21.9).
Our meta-analysis highlights differential effects of conventional and pulsed taVNS protocols on pupil dilation. These findings underscore the relevance of taVNS protocols in optimizing its use for specific applications that may require modulation of tonic vs. phasic monoaminergic responses and might also help to gain mechanistic insights into potential therapeutic effects.
经皮迷走神经刺激(tVNS)已成为一种有前景的调节自主神经功能的技术,瞳孔扩张已被认为是tVNS诱导单胺能释放的一种有前景的生物标志物。然而,迄今为止,关于各种tVNS方案有效性的研究在瞳孔扩张方面产生了不一致的结果。
在此,我们综合现有证据,并使用贝叶斯荟萃分析比较传统(“连续”)和脉冲刺激方案。为了保持实时更新版本,我们开发了一个Shiny应用程序,以便未来能够纳入新发表的研究。基于系统评价,我们纳入了18项应用传统或脉冲刺激方案的研究(N = 771)。
在各项研究中,我们发现了支持零假设的轶事证据,表明经皮耳迷走神经刺激(taVNS)不会增加瞳孔大小(g = 0.15,95%可信区间 = [0.03, 0.27],贝叶斯因子 = 1.0)。根据传统方案与脉冲方案对研究进行分类后发现,使用脉冲taVNS的研究为备择假设提供了有力证据(g = 0.36,95%可信区间 = [0.19, 0.53],贝叶斯因子 = 50.8),而传统taVNS研究为零假设提供了有力证据(g = 0.002,可信区间 = [-0.14, 0.14],贝叶斯因子 = 21.9)。
我们的荟萃分析突出了传统和脉冲taVNS方案对瞳孔扩张的不同影响。这些发现强调了taVNS方案在优化其用于可能需要调节持续性与阶段性单胺能反应的特定应用中的相关性,并且可能有助于深入了解潜在治疗效果的机制。