Key result
First-generation Rheos links to greater BP reduction, while Neo associates mainly with lower HR in resistant hypertension.
Why the study?
Does baroreflex activation therapy reduce 24h blood pressure and heart rate in patients with resistant hypertension, and how do first- and second-generation devices compare?
Does baroreflex activation therapy reduce 24h blood pressure and heart rate in patients with resistant hypertension, and how do first- and second-generation devices compare?
First-generation baroreflex activation devices provided better blood pressure reduction than second-generation devices in resistant hypertension, highlighting the impact of electrode design and implantation strategy.
Should not yet guide device selection in resistant hypertension; extends prior evidence on generation-specific baroreflex effects.
Baroreflex activation was safe and associated with reductions in 24h blood pressure and heart rate in patients with resistant hypertension. The first-generation Rheos® system demonstrated more pronounced blood pressure-lowering effects, whereas the second-generation Neo™ system was associated primarily with heart rate reduction without a significant effect on blood pressure. Although Rheos® is no longer commercially available, these findings highlight the importance of electrode design, implantation strategy, and patient selection in optimizing the efficacy of contemporary BAT.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kaufeld et al. (2026) studied this question. First-generation Rheos® device lowered 24h blood pressure more, while second-generation Neo™ mainly reduced heart rate in resistant hypertension patients.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: