Vagus Nerve Stimulation in Ischemic Stroke.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) has emerged as a potential therapeutic approach for neurological and psychiatric disorders. In recent years, there has been increasing interest in VNS for treating ischemic stroke. This review discusses the evidence supporting VNS as a treatment option for ischemic stroke and elucidates its underlying mechanisms. RECENT FINDINGS: Preclinical studies investigating VNS in stroke models have shown reduced infarct volumes and improved neurological deficits. Additionally, VNS has been found to reduce reperfusion injury. VNS may promote neuroprotection by reducing inflammation, enhancing cerebral blood flow, and modulating the release of neurotransmitters. Additionally, VNS may stimulate neuroplasticity, thereby facilitating post-stroke recovery. The Food and Drug Administration has approved invasive VNS (iVNS) combined with rehabilitation for ischemic stroke patients with moderate to severe upper limb deficits. However, iVNS is not feasible in acute stroke due to its time-sensitive nature. Non-invasive VNS (nVNS) may be an alternative approach for treating ischemic stroke. While the evidence from preclinical studies and clinical trials of nVNS is promising, the mechanisms through which VNS exerts its beneficial effects on ischemic stroke are still being elucidated. Therefore, further research is needed to better understand the efficacy and underlying mechanisms of nVNS in ischemic stroke. Moreover, large-scale randomized clinical trials are necessary to determine the optimal nVNS protocols, assess its long-term effects on stroke recovery and outcomes, and identify the potential benefits of combining nVNS with other rehabilitation strategies.

Effect of High-Flow Oxygen Therapy vs Conventional Oxygen Therapy on Invasive Mechanical Ventilation and Clinical Recovery in Patients With Severe COVID-19: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

IMPORTANCE: The effect of high-flow oxygen therapy vs conventional oxygen therapy has not been established in the setting of severe COVID-19. OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of high-flow oxygen therapy through a nasal cannula compared with conventional oxygen therapy on need for endotracheal intubation and clinical recovery in severe COVID-19. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: Randomized, open-label clinical trial conducted in emergency and intensive care units in 3 hospitals in Colombia. A total of 220 adults with respiratory distress and a ratio of partial pressure of arterial oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen of less than 200 due to COVID-19 were randomized from August 2020 to January 2021, with last follow-up on February 10, 2021. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to receive high-flow oxygen through a nasal cannula (n = 109) or conventional oxygen therapy (n = 111). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The co-primary outcomes were need for intubation and time to clinical recovery until day 28 as assessed by a 7-category ordinal scale (range, 1-7, with higher scores indicating a worse condition). Effects of treatments were calculated with a Cox proportional hazards model adjusted for hypoxemia severity, age, and comorbidities. RESULTS: Among 220 randomized patients, 199 were included in the analysis (median age, 60 years; n = 65 women [32.7%]). Intubation occurred in 34 (34.3%) randomized to high-flow oxygen therapy and in 51 (51.0%) randomized to conventional oxygen therapy (hazard ratio, 0.62; 95% CI, 0.39-0.96; P = .03). The median time to clinical recovery within 28 days was 11 (IQR, 9-14) days in patients randomized to high-flow oxygen therapy vs 14 (IQR, 11-19) days in those randomized to conventional oxygen therapy (hazard ratio, 1.39; 95% CI, 1.00-1.92; P = .047). Suspected bacterial pneumonia occurred in 13 patients (13.1%) randomized to high-flow oxygen and in 17 (17.0%) of those randomized to conventional oxygen therapy, while bacteremia was detected in 7 (7.1%) vs 11 (11.0%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: Among patients with severe COVID-19, use of high-flow oxygen through a nasal cannula significantly decreased need for mechanical ventilation support and time to clinical recovery compared with conventional low-flow oxygen therapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04609462.