SynthesisMedicine2016
Renal denervation, adjusted drugs, or combined therapy for resistant hypertension: A meta-regression.
Synthesis in Medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed, 3 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mechanisms in hypertension and target organ damage: Is the role of the thymus key? (Review).International journal of molecular medicine · 2018Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The objective of this study is to systematically evaluate the efficacy of renal denervation (RD), adjusted drugs, or combined therapy for resistant hypertension (RH) through a systematic review and meta-analysis of controlled studies.Publications were comprehensively searched. Studies that investigated the effects of RD and/or adjusted drugs in lowering blood pressure (BP) were included. After quality assessment and data extraction, subgroup analyzes were first performed according to blinding method. Meta-regression and inverted funnel plots were also conducted.A total of 13 studies containing 1604 RH patients were included. Compared with control, the meta-analysis showed that RD significantly reduced office-based BP and ambulatory BP in 6 months in the unblinded studies, while no significant difference was found in the blinded studies. Meta-regression demonstrated the significant influence of blinding method on BP reduction, and further analysis revealed a significant BP reduction compared with baseline even in the control arm of blinded studies. RD had similar effects compared with adjusted drugs, and combined therapy seemed to further reduce the level of BP.The efficacy of RD was different between blinded and unblinded studies, and our data revealed a significant BP-lowering effect in the control arm of blinded studies, which was helpful to explain this finding. Furthermore, RD seemed to be equivalent to adjusted drugs, and also we suggested a potential advantage of combined therapy of RD and adjusted drugs compared with monotherapy for RH. However, more studies are warranted to better address the issue.
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.