1. Vagus nerve stimulation for the treatment of narcolepsy.
- Author
-
Winter Y, Sandner K, Bassetti CLA, Glaser M, Ciolac D, Ziebart A, Karakoyun A, Saryyeva A, Krauss JK, Ringel F, and Groppa S
- Subjects
- Humans, Prospective Studies, Sleepiness, Treatment Outcome, Vagus Nerve physiology, Adult, Cataplexy therapy, Epilepsy therapy, Narcolepsy therapy, Vagus Nerve Stimulation
- Abstract
Background and Objective: No study on neurostimulation in narcolepsy is available until now. Arousal- and wake-promoting effects of vagus nerve stimulation (VNS) have been demonstrated in animal experiments and are well-known as side effects of VNS therapy in epilepsy and depression. The objective was to evaluate the therapeutic effect of VNS on daily sleepiness and cataplexies in narcolepsy., Methods: In our open-label prospective comparative study, we included narcolepsy patients who were treated with VNS because of depression or epilepsy and compared them to controls without narcolepsy treated with VNS for depression or epilepsy (18 patients in each group, aged 31.5 ± 8.2 years). We evaluated daily sleepiness (Epworth Sleepiness Scale, ESS) and the number of cataplexies per week before the implantation of VNS and at three and six month follow-ups., Results: Compared to baseline (ESS: 15.9 ± 2.5) patients with narcolepsy showed a significant improvement on ESS after three months (11.2 ± 3.3, p < 0.05) and six months (9.6 ± 2.8, p < 0.001) and a trend to reduction of cataplexies. No significant ESS-improvement was observed in patients without narcolepsy (14.9 ± 3.9, 13.6 ± 3.7, 13.2 ± 3.5, p = 0.2 at baseline, three and six months, correspondingly). Side effects did not differ between the study groups., Conclusion: In this first evaluation of VNS in narcolepsy, we found a significant improvement of daily sleepiness due to this type of neurostimulation. VNS could be a promising non-medical treatment in narcolepsy., Competing Interests: Declaration of competing interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests:YW reports honoraria for educational presentations and consultations from Angelini Pharma, Arvelle Therapeutics, Bayer AG, BIAL, Bioprojet, Eisai, Idorsia Pharmaceuticals, JAZZ Pharmaceuticals, LivaNova, Novartis and UCB Pharma. SG received compensation for professional services from Abbott, Abbvie, Bial, Medtronic, UCB and Zambon; research grants from Abbott, Boston Scientific, MagVenture, German Research Council and German Ministry of Education and Health. MG received honoraria and educational grants from Precisis, LivaNova, Abbott, Medtronic, Boston Scientific and Nevro. CB, KS, DC, AZ, AK and AS declare no conflict of interest. JK performed consultations for Medtronic and Boston Scientific. FR is a consultant for Stryker, Brainlab, Icotec and Spineart and receives royalties from Spineart., (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF