Toward Diverse or Standardized: A Systematic Review Identifying Transcutaneous Stimulation of Auricular Branch of the Vagus Nerve in Nomenclature

OBJECTIVES

After 20 years of development, there is confusion in the nomenclature of transcutaneous stimulation of the auricular branch of the vagus nerve (ABVN). We performed a systematic review of transcutaneous stimulation of ABVN in nomenclature.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A systematic search of the literature was carried out, using the bibliographic search engine PubMed. The search covered articles published up until June 11, 2020. We recorded the full nomenclature and abbreviated nomenclature same or similar to transcutaneous stimulation of ABVN in the selected eligible studies, as well as the time and author information of this nomenclature.

RESULTS

From 261 studies, 67 full nomenclatures and 27 abbreviated nomenclatures were finally screened out, transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation and tVNS are the most common nomenclature, accounting for 38.38% and 42.06%, respectively. In a total of 97 combinations of full nomenclatures and abbreviations, the most commonly used nomenclature for the combination of transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation and tVNS, accounting for 30.28%. Interestingly, the combination of full nomenclatures and abbreviations is not always a one-to-one relationship, there are ten abbreviated nomenclatures corresponding to transcutaneous vagus nerve stimulation, and five full nomenclatures corresponding to tVNS. In addition, based on the analysis of the usage habits of nomenclature in 21 teams, it is found that only three teams have fixed habits, while other different teams or the same team do not always use the same nomenclature in their paper.

CONCLUSIONS

The phenomenon of confusion in the nomenclature of transcutaneous stimulation of ABVN is obvious and shows a trend of diversity. The nomenclature of transcutaneous stimulation of ABVN needs to become more standardized in the future.

Electric hearing and tinnitus suppression by noninvasive ear stimulation

While noninvasive brain stimulation is convenient and cost effective, its utility is limited by the substantial distance between scalp electrodes and their intended neural targets in the head. The tympanic membrane, or eardrum, is a thin flap of skin deep in an orifice of the head that may serve as a port for improved efficiency of noninvasive stimulation. Here we chose the cochlea as a target because it resides in the densest bone of the skull and is adjacent to many deep-brain-stimulation structures. We also tested the hypothesis that noninvasive electric stimulation of the cochlea may restore neural activities that are missing in acoustic stimulation. We placed an electrode in the ear canal or on the tympanic membrane in 25 human adults (10 females) and compared their stimulation efficiency by characterizing the electrically-evoked auditory sensation. Relative to ear canal stimulation, tympanic membrane stimulation was four times more likely to produce an auditory percept, required eight times lower electric current to reach the threshold and produced two-to-four times more linear suprathreshold responses. We further measured tinnitus suppression in 14 of the 25 subjects who had chronic tinnitus. Compared with ear canal stimulation, tympanic membrane stimulation doubled both the probability (22% vs. 55%) and the amount (-15% vs. -34%) of tinnitus suppression. These findings extended previous work comparing evoked perception and tinnitus suppression between electrodes placed in the ear canal and on the scalp. Together, the previous and present results suggest that the efficiency of conventional scalp-based noninvasive electric stimulation can be improved by at least one order of magnitude via tympanic membrane stimulation. This increased efficiency is most likely due to the shortened distance between the electrode placed on the tympanic membrane and the targeted cochlea. The present findings have implications for the management of tinnitus by offering a potential alternative to interventions using invasive electrical stimulation such as cochlear implantation, or other non-invasive transcranial electrical stimulation methods.

Human Sensation of Transcranial Electric Stimulation

Noninvasive transcranial electric stimulation is increasingly being used as an advantageous therapy alternative that may activate deep tissues while avoiding drug side-effects. However, not only is there limited evidence for activation of deep tissues by transcranial electric stimulation, its evoked human sensation is understudied and often dismissed as a placebo or secondary effect. By systematically characterizing the human sensation evoked by transcranial alternating-current stimulation, we observed not only stimulus frequency and electrode position dependencies specific for auditory and visual sensation but also a broader presence of somatic sensation ranging from touch and vibration to pain and pressure. We found generally monotonic input-output functions at suprathreshold levels, and often multiple types of sensation occurring simultaneously in response to the same electric stimulation. We further used a recording circuit embedded in a cochlear implant to directly and objectively measure the amount of transcranial electric stimulation reaching the auditory nerve, a deep intercranial target located in the densest bone of the skull. We found an optimal configuration using an ear canal electrode and low-frequency (<300 Hz) sinusoids that delivered maximally ~1% of the transcranial current to the auditory nerve, which was sufficient to produce sound sensation even in deafened ears. Our results suggest that frequency resonance due to neuronal intrinsic electric properties need to be explored for targeted deep brain stimulation and novel brain-computer interfaces.

Tinnitus Treatment Using Noninvasive and Minimally Invasive Electric Stimulation: Experimental Design and Feasibility

Noninvasive transcranial or minimally invasive transtympanic electric stimulation may offer a desirable treatment option for tinnitus because it can activate the deafferented auditory nerve fibers while posing little to no risk to hearing. Here, we built a flexible research interface to generate and control accurately charge-balanced current stimulation as well as a head-mounted instrument capable of holding a transtympanic electrode steady for hours. We then investigated the short-term effect of a limited set of electric stimulation parameters on tinnitus in 10 adults with chronic tinnitus. The preliminary results showed that 63% of conditions of electric stimulation produced some degree of tinnitus reduction, with total disappearance of tinnitus in six subjects in response to at least one condition. The present study also found significant side effects such as visual, tactile, and even pain sensations during electric stimulation. In addition to masking and residual inhibition, neuroplasticity is likely involved in the observed tinnitus reduction. To translate the present electric stimulation into a safe and effective tinnitus treatment option, we need to optimize stimulation parameters that activate the deafferented auditory nerve fibers and reliably suppress tinnitus, with minimal side effects and tolerable sensations. Noninvasive or minimally invasive electric stimulation can be integrated with sound therapy, invasive cochlear implants, or other forms of coordinated stimulation to provide a systematic strategy for tinnitus treatment or even a cure.