Key result
RDN shows potential benefit for refractory hypertension but long-term effects remain unknown.
Why the study?
Does catheter-based renal denervation improve outcomes in patients with refractory hypertension?
Does catheter-based renal denervation improve outcomes in patients with refractory hypertension?
Renal denervation is a promising catheter-based therapy for refractory hypertension, but requires further solid, randomized data to establish long-term efficacy and safety.
May warrant consideration in refractory hypertension; leaves open need for long-term randomized efficacy and safety data.
BACKGROUND: Hypertension continues to be a major burden of public health concern despite the recent advances and proven benefit of pharmacological therapy. A certain subset of patients has hypertension resistant to maximal medical therapy and appropriate lifestyle measures. A novel catheter-based technique for renal denervation (RDN) as a new therapeutic avenue has great promise for the treatment of refractory hypertension. SUMMARY: This review included the physiology of the renal sympathetic nervous system and the renal nerve anatomy. Furthermore, the RDN procedure, technology systems, and RDN clinical trials as well as findings besides antihypertensive effects were discussed. Findings on safety and efficacy seem to suggest that renal sympathetic denervation could be of therapeutic benefit in refractory hypertensive patients. Despite the fast pace of development in RDN therapies, only initial and very limited clinical data are available. Large gaps in knowledge concerning the long-term effects and consequences of RDN still exist, and solid, randomized data are warranted.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ariyanon et al. (2014) conducted a review in Intractable hypertension. Renal denervation (RDN) was evaluated. Renal sympathetic denervation could be of therapeutic benefit in refractory hypertensive patients, though large gaps in knowledge concerning long-term effects remain.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: