Join us for the Seventh Bioelectronic Medicine Summit: New Targets and Therapies Across Organs and Systems. September 28-29, 2026 at The Lighthouse, Chelsea Piers, NYC. Hosted by the Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research #BioelectronicMedicinewhova.com/portal/registratio…
SPARC has closed. Its stated purpose: "accelerate development of therapeutic devices that modulate electrical activity in nerves to improve organ function."
Here Patel and colleagues lay out what a decade bought: over $350 million, close to 100 projects, 500 papers, 300 open datasets, cross-species vagus maps, ASCENT for modeling stimulation, safety models now used in FDA submissions, open implant platforms. All of it public. SPARC was a big win for bioelectronic medicine.
But was it a big enough win, and where are we today?
We know very little more about translating this technology to the millions of patients who need it.
We have precious few randomized, well powered, controlled trials of implanted VNS or taVNS in people suffering the complications of inflammation.
That may not have been SPARC's stated mission. But the basic anti-inflammatory mechanisms were already well established when the program began.
We need to move faster from mechanism to therapy.
The obstacles are real. As a cofounder of SetPoint Medical, I know them well.
So what are the solutions?
Where are the new paths to moving faster?
Should we accelerate studies of approved devices to expand their indications?
Should we run well designed trials of the over-the-counter devices to get answers to simple questions about wellness and effectiveness?
There is a fantastic opportunity for new entrants with new ideas.
Who are you, and what are your ideas?
link.springer.com/article/10…
August article: Accelerating the development of bioelectronic medicine: overview and impact of the NIH Stimulating Peripheral Activity to Relieve Conditions (SPARC) initiative | #BioelectronicMedicine#SPARClink.springer.com/article/10…
Join us for the Seventh Bioelectronic Medicine Summit: New Targets and Therapies Across Organs and Systems. September 28-29, 2026 at The Lighthouse, Chelsea Piers, NYC. Hosted by the Feinstein Institutes for Medical Research #BioelectronicMedicinewhova.com/portal/registratio…
Published today: "Continuous vs. intermittent chronic vagus nerve stimulation: effects on T-cell dependent antibody response, heart rate variability and body weight in immunized mice", by Gerber, Mughrabi et al. #BioelectronicMedicine#VNS#HRVlink.springer.com/article/10…
ALT Fig. 1 B- Physiological monitoring. Signals for each participant were recorded by a six-lead electrocardiogram (in red, wires attached to four foam adhesive electrodes placed at each shoulder and each ankle) and noninvasive blood pressure (in blue, small inflatable cuff on middle phalanx of middle finger). A dry electroencephalography system was placed on the participant’s head, while eye tracking glasses were used to record pupil diameter and gaze location. C-Bilateral stimulation montage. Adhesive electrodes were placed on each side of the neck, between the ear and jawline, and each side of the torso, below the ribcage on the midclavicular line. The return for each neck electrode was on the contralateral torso electrode. D One-sided stimulation montage. Adhesive electrodes were placed on one side of the neck, between the ear and jawline, and the return electrode was on the ipsilateral side of the torso, below the ribcage on the midclavicular line. Shown is the right side only
ALT Fig 1. B- Transcutaneous auricular VNS (taVNS) of auricular branch of the vagus nerve (ABVN) or tAN (stimulation of auriculotemporal nerve (ATN) and ABVN) administered via Spark Volta device. C- Electrode positioning for taVNS (regions 1 and 3) or tAN (regions 1, 2 and 3). Region 3 is the return electrode. Adapted from Czura et al. (Czura et al. 2026)
ALT Fig4.Comparison of visualization approaches: volumetric rendering versus hybrid vascular-skeletal display. Representative images comparing two distinct VR implementation strategies for pancreatic tumor assessment. Left panels show the volumetric rendering approach used in this study: coronal view (A) and axial view (C) displaying abdominal CT with minimal opacity adjustments approximating CSI abdominal windowing, maintaining visualization of all soft tissue structures including pancreas, liver, and bowel. Right (B, D) demonstrate the hybrid approach described by Kunz et al., displaying exclusively isolated osseous structures and contrast-enhanced vessels with integrated cross-sectional cutting planes. Original image cropped and adapted from Kunz JM, et al. Assessment of resectability of pancreatic cancer using novel immersive high-performance virtual reality rendering of abdominal computed tomography and magnetic resonance imaging. Int J Comput Assist Radiol Surg.2024;19:1677–1687. CC4