Key result
Bilateral cervical vagal nerve stimulation slowed AV nodal recovery, increasing the time constant of recovery from 80 to 194 msec (P<0.01).
Why the study?
Does bilateral cervical vagal nerve stimulation alter AV nodal recovery, facilitation, and fatigue in chloralose-anesthetized dogs?
Population
chloralose-anesthetized dogs
Comparison
bilateral cervical vagal nerve stimulation vs absence of vagal stimulation (control)
Design
Preclinical
Authors
Loading...
Rate-dependent vagal AV nodal slowing may inform AF rate control; leaves open human mechanistic and clinical translation.
Does bilateral cervical vagal nerve stimulation alter AV nodal recovery, facilitation, and fatigue in chloralose-anesthetized dogs?
Absolute Event Rate: 194% vs 80%
p-value: p=<0.01
Vagal stimulation alters the rate-dependent properties of the AV node, primarily by slowing recovery, which accounts for most of its negative dromotropic action during rapid heart rates.
Nayebpour et al. (1990) studied this question. Bilateral cervical vagal nerve stimulation vs. Absence of vagal stimulation was evaluated on Time constant of AV nodal recovery (tau r) (p=<0.01). Bilateral cervical vagal nerve stimulation slowed AV nodal recovery, increasing the time constant of recovery from 80 to 194 msec (P<0.01).
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: