Blood pressure changes after renal denervation at 10 European expert centers

We did a subject-level meta-analysis of the changes (Δ) in blood pressure (BP) observed 3 and 6 months after renal denervation (RDN) at 10 European centers. Recruited patients (n=109; 46.8% women; mean age 58.2 years) had essential hypertension confirmed by ambulatory BP. From baseline to 6 months, treatment score declined slightly from 4.7 to 4.4 drugs per day. Systolic/diastolic BP fell by 17.6/7.1 mm Hg for office BP, and by 5.9/3.5, 6.2/3.4, and 4.4/2.5 mm Hg for 24-h, daytime and nighttime BP (P0.03 for all). In 47 patients with 3- and 6-month ambulatory measurements, systolic BP did not change between these two time points (P0.08). Normalization was a systolic BP of <140 mm Hg on office measurement or <130 mm Hg on 24-h monitoring and improvement was a fall of 10 mm Hg, irrespective of measurement technique. For office BP, at 6 months, normalization, improvement or no decrease occurred in 22.9, 59.6 and 22.9% of patients, respectively; for 24-h BP, these proportions were 14.7, 31.2 and 34.9%, respectively. Higher baseline BP predicted greater BP fall at follow-up; higher baseline serum creatinine was associated with lower probability of improvement of 24-h BP (odds ratio for 20-μmol l(-1) increase, 0.60; P=0.05) and higher probability of experiencing no BP decrease (OR, 1.66; P=0.01). In conclusion, BP responses to RDN include regression-to-the-mean and remain to be consolidated in randomized trials based on ambulatory BP monitoring. For now, RDN should remain the last resort in patients in whom all other ways to control BP failed, and it must be cautiously used in patients with renal impairment

Blood pressure response to renal denervation is correlated with baseline blood pressure variability: a patient-level meta-analysis

Background: Sympathetic tone is one of the main determinants of blood pressure (BP) variability and treatment-resistant hypertension. The aim of our study was to assess changes in BP variability after renal denervation (RDN). In addition, on an exploratory basis, we investigated whether baseline BP variability predicted the BP changes after RDN. Methods: We analyzed 24-h BP recordings obtained at baseline and 6 months after RDN in 167 treatmentresistant hypertension patients (40% women; age, 56.7 years; mean 24-h BP, 152/90 mmHg) recruited at 11 expert centers. BP variability was assessed by weighted SD [SD over time weighted for the time interval between consecutive readings (SDiw)], average real variability (ARV), coefficient of variation, and variability independent of the mean (VIM). Results: Mean office and 24-h BP fell by 15.4/6.6 and 5.5/ 3.7 mmHg, respectively (P < 0.001). In multivariable-adjusted analyses, systolic/diastolic SDiw and VIM for 24-h SBP/DBP decreased by 1.18/0.63 mmHg (P 0.01) and 0.86/0.42 mmHg (P 0.05), respectively, whereas no significant changes in ARV or coefficient of variation occurred. Furthermore, baseline SDiw (P ¼ 0.0006), ARV (P ¼ 0.01), and VIM (P ¼ 0.04) predicted the decrease in 24-h DBP but not 24-h SBP after RDN. Conclusion: RDN was associated with a decrease in BP variability independent of the BP level, suggesting that responders may derive benefits from the reduction in BP variability as well. Furthermore, baseline DBP variability estimates significantly correlated with mean DBP decrease after RDN. If confirmed in younger patients with less arterial damage, in the absence of the confounding effect of drugs and drug adherence, baseline BP variability may prove a good predictor of BP response to RDN

Sham or no sham control: that is the question in trials of renal denervation for resistant hypertension. A systematic meta-analysis

BACKGROUND: Studies of renal denervation (RDN) in patients with apparent treatment resistant hypertension have been hampered by a number of patient and physician related confounders on blood pressure (BP) including poor drug adherence. It remains uncertain whether RDN lowers BP. We aimed to investigate whether the use of sham control is essential in RDN studies or whether systematic use of 24-hour ambulatory BP provides enough information thereby making an invasive sham control redundant. METHODS: We meta-analyzed randomized controlled trials of the BP response to RDN on top of continued or optimized antihypertensive drugs in patients with resistant hypertension. On top of the randomized trials reviewed earlier, we additionally included three studies, one conducted in Spain (24 patients, RDN vs. spironolactone), one conducted in Denmark (69 patients, sham controlled) and one conducted in Netherlands (139 patients, RDN vs. continued treatment). We analyzed 24-hour ambulatory BP in 3 sham controlled studies vs. 7 no sham controlled studies. RESULTS: The updated meta-analysis of 10 studies showed 3.6 mmHg (p = .45) and 1.0 mmHg (p = .54) reductions in office and in 24-hour systolic BP, respectively. Meta-analysis of 24-hour systolic BP in the 3 sham-controlled studies showed a reduction of 2.18 mmHg (95% confidence intervals (CIs) -4.70 to 0.33 mmHg, n = 396 vs. 230, p = .07). For the 7 no sham controlled studies there was no difference in 24-hour systolic BP (+0.38 mmHg; 95% CIs -5.29 to 6.04 mmHg, n = 215 vs. 245, p = .90). The test for sub-group heterogeneity showed no significant interaction (p = .69). Removing one trial at a time produced confirmatory results. CONCLUSION: The overall meta-analysis of 10 randomized and controlled studies showed no significant effect on BP of RDN in resistant hypertension. Moreover, our analysis does not support the use of sham control but rather suggests extensive use of 24-hour ambulatory BP in studies of RDN in resistant hypertension

Hyperresponders vs. nonresponder patients after renal denervation: do they differ?

Blood pressure (BP) response after renal denervation (RDN) is highly variable. Besides baseline BP, no reliable predictors of response have been consistently identified. The differences between patients showing a major BP decrease after RDN vs. nonresponders have not been studied so far.status: publishe

Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials of renal denervation in treatment-resistant hypertension

Objective. The blood pressure (BP)-lowering effect of renal sympathetic nervous denervation (RDN) in resistant hypertension (rHT) shows large variation among studies. Methods. We meta-analyzed summary statistics of randomized clinical trials on RDN in rHT. For continuous outcomes, we assessed heterogeneity by Cochran's Q test and used random-effect models weighted for the inverse of the variance. We assessed safety by assessing the risk of major adverse events from stratified contingency tables. Results. Of 5652 patients screened in seven trials, 985 (17.4%) qualified and were randomized to control (n = 397) or RDN with SYMPLICITY™ catheters (n = 588). Follow-up was 6 months. In both control and RDN patients, antihypertensive treatment was continued or optimized. At enrolment, age averaged 58.1 years, systolic/diastolic office and 24 h BP 168.5/93.3 mmHg and 151.8/86.1 mmHg, respectively, and estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) 79.3 ml/min/1.73 m². For BP outcomes, there was heterogeneity among trials. Pooled effects (control minus RDN) were −4.9/−3.5 mmHg (95% confidence interval, −20.9 to 11.1/−8.9 to 1.9) for office BP, −2.8/−1.5 mmHg (−6.5 to 0.8/−3.3 to 0.4) for 24 h BP and 0.81 ml/min/1.73 m² (−1.69 to 3.30) for eGFR. Removing one trial at a time produced confirmatory results. Adverse events occurred in 7.4% and 9.9% of control and RDN patients, respectively (p = 0.24). Conclusion. In selected rHT patients maintained on antihypertensive drugs, RDN with the SYMPLICITY systems does not significantly decrease BP but is safe. Future trials with next-generation catheters should aim at identifying responders in patients with evidence of sympathetic nervous overactivity

Renal artery and parenchymal changes after renal denervation: assessment by magnetic resonance angiography

OBJECTIVES: Relatively little is known about the incidence of long-term renal damage after renal denervation (RDN), a potential new treatment for hypertension. In this study the incidence of renal artery and parenchymal changes, assessed with contrast-enhanced magnetic resonance angiography (MRA) after RDN, is investigated. METHODS: This study is an initiative of ENCOReD, a collaboration of hypertension expert centres. Patients in whom an MRA was performed before and after RDN were included. Scans were evaluated by two independent, blinded radiologists. Primary outcome was the change in renal artery morphology and parenchyma. RESULTS: MRAs from 96 patients were analysed. Before RDN, 41 renal anomalies were observed, of which 29 mostly mild renal artery stenoses. After a median time of 366 days post RDN, MRA showed a new stenosis (25-49% lumen reduction) in two patients and progression of pre-existing lumen reduction in a single patient. No other renal changes were observed and renal function remained stable. CONCLUSIONS: We observed new or progressed renal artery stenosis in three out of 96 patients, after a median time of 12 months post RDN (3.1%). Procedural angiographies showed that ablations were applied near the observed stenosis in only one of the three patients. KEY POINTS: • The incidence of vascular changes 12 months post RDN was 3.1%. • No renal vascular or parenchymal changes other than stenoses were observed. • Ablations were applied near the stenosis in only one of three patients