ReviewCurrent cardiology reports2011
Premise, promise, and potential limitations of invasive devices to treat hypertension.
Review in Current cardiology reports, 2011. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
7 citing papers in PubMed, 14 citations in OpenAlex.
- Review
- Device-Based Therapy for Drug-Resistant Hypertension: An Update.Current hypertension reports · 2016Review
- Carotid baroreflex activation therapy for resistant hypertension.Nature reviews. Cardiology · 2015Review
- Circulating adipokines and insulin resistance in subjects with combined cardiac and metabolic syndrome X.Diabetology & metabolic syndrome · 2015Article
- The effects of catheter-based radiofrequency renal denervation on renal function and renal artery structure in patients with resistant hypertension.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2014Article
- Diagnosis and treatment of resistant hypertension: the critical role of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2013Article
- Drug-resistant hypertension: is renal sympathetic denervation the answer?Current cardiology reports · 2011Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Invasive device-based therapies for drug-resistant hypertension are undergoing active clinical investigation. The two approaches are 1) permanent implantation of a carotid baroreceptor pacemaker and 2) radiofrequency catheter ablation of the renal nerves. Both are designed to reduce the sympathetic nervous system component of drug-resistant hypertension. Several excellent comprehensive articles have reviewed each of these devices separately. In contrast, this brief article aims to provide a conceptual framework for evaluating the premise, promise, and potential limitations of both invasive antihypertensive therapies.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.