SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2017
Renal denervation for resistant hypertension.
Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
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
18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.
- Renal denervation for resistant hypertension.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021Pooled it
- Immunology of Hypertension: Pathophysiological and Therapeutic Aspects.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Spice Up Your Kidney: A Review on the Effects of Capsaicin in Renal Physiology and Disease.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Review
- Renal denervation in the antihypertensive arsenal - knowns and known unknowns.Journal of hypertension · 2022Article
- OCT angiography metrics predict intradialytic hypotension episodes in chronic hemodialysis patients: a pilot, prospective study.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Renal Denervation for Uncontrolled and Resistant Hypertension: Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis of Randomized Trials.Journal of clinical medicine · 2021Review
- Optimizing identification of resistant hypertension: Computable phenotype development and validation.Pharmacoepidemiology and drug safety · 2020Article
- Renal Innervation in Resistant Hypertension: A Review of Pathophysiology and Renal Denervation as Potential Treatment.Current hypertension reviews · 2020Review
- Shaping the future of renal denervation-the relevance of sham-controlled randomized trials and recent meta-analyses.Cardiovascular diagnosis and therapy · 2019Article
- Hypertension: a new treatment for an old disease? Targeting the immune system.British journal of pharmacology · 2019Review
- Renal Artery Denervation for Hypertension.Current treatment options in cardiovascular medicine · 2019Review
- Unraveling Cardiovascular Risk in Renal Patients: A New Take on Old Tale.Frontiers in cell and developmental biology · 2019Review
- Update on heart failure management and future directions.The Korean journal of internal medicine · 2019Review
- Renal perivascular adipose tissue: Form and function.Vascular pharmacology · 2018Article
- Controlling Hypertension: We Have the Tools-We Just Need to Use Them.Journal of general internal medicine · 2017Article
- Device-Based Approaches for the Treatment of Arterial Hypertension.Current hypertension reports · 2017Review
- Resistant and refractory hypertension: two sides of the same disease?Jornal brasileiro de nefrologiaArticle
Corrections and comments
- Updated by
Authors and funding
4 authors at 3 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundResistant hypertension is highly prevalent among the general hypertensive population and the clinical management of this condition remains problematic. Different approaches, including a more intensified antihypertensive therapy, lifestyle modifications, or both, have largely failed to improve patients' outcomes and to reduce cardiovascular and renal risk. As renal sympathetic hyperactivity is a major driver of resistant hypertension, renal sympathetic ablation (renal denervation) has been recently proposed as a possible therapeutic alternative to treat this condition.
objectivesWe sought to evaluate the short- and long-term effects of renal denervation in individuals with resistant hypertension on clinical end points, including fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular events, all-cause mortality, hospital admissions, quality of life, blood pressure control, left ventricular hypertrophy, cardiovascular and metabolic profile, and kidney function, as well as the potential adverse events related to the procedure. SEARCH
methodsWe searched the following databases to 17 February 2016 using relevant search terms: the Cochrane Hypertension Group Specialised Register, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, EMBASE and ClinicalTrials.gov SELECTION CRITERIA: We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared renal denervation to standard therapy or sham procedure to treat resistant hypertension, without language restriction. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently extracted data and assessed study risks of bias. We summarised treatment effects on available clinical outcomes and adverse events using random-effects meta-analyses. We assessed heterogeneity in estimated treatment effects using Chi² and I² statistics. We calculated summary treatment estimates as a mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) for continuous outcomes, and a risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes, together with their 95% confidence intervals (CI). MAIN
resultsWe found 12 eligible studies (1149 participants). In four studies, renal denervation was compared to sham procedure; one study compared a proximal ablation to a complete renal artery denervation; in the remaining, renal denervation was tested against standard or intensified antihypertensive therapy.None of the included trials was designed to look at hard clinical end points as primary outcomes.When compared to control, there was low quality evidence that renal denervation did not reduce the risk of myocardial infarction (4 studies, 742 participants; RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.45 to 3.84), ischaemic stroke (4 studies, 823 participants; RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.36 to 3.72), or unstable angina (2 studies, 201 participants; RR 0.63, 95% CI 0.08 to 5.06), and moderate quality evidence that it had no effect on 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) systolic BP (5 studies, 797 participants; MD 0.28 mmHg, 95% CI -3.74 to 4.29), diastolic BP (4 studies, 756 participants; MD 0.93 mmHg, 95% CI -4.50 to 6.36), office measured systolic BP (6 studies, 886 participants; MD -4.08 mmHg, 95% CI -15.26 to 7.11), or diastolic BP (5 studies, 845 participants; MD -1.30 mmHg, 95% CI -7.30 to 4.69). Furthermore, low quality evidence suggested that this procedure produced no effect on either serum creatinine (3 studies, 736 participants, MD 0.01 mg/dL; 95% CI -0.12 to 0.14), estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR), or creatinine clearance (4 studies, 837 participants; MD -2.09 mL/min, 95% CI -8.12 to 3.95). Based on low-quality evidence, renal denervation significantly increased bradycardia episodes compared to control (3 studies, 220 participants; RR 6.63, 95% CI 1.19 to 36.84), while the risk of other adverse events was comparable or not assessable.Data were sparse or absent for all cause mortality, hospitalisation, fatal cardiovascular events, quality of life, atrial fibrillation episodes, left ventricular hypertrophy, sleep apnoea severity, need for renal replacement therapy, and metabolic profile.The quality of the evidence was low for cardiovascular outcomes and adverse events and moderate for lack of effect on blood pressure and renal function. AUTHORS'
conclusionsIn patients with resistant hypertension, there is low quality evidence that renal denervation does not change major cardiovascular events, and renal function. There was moderate quality evidence that it does not change blood pressure and and low quality evidence that it caused an increaseof bradycardia episodes. Future trials measuring patient-centred instead of surrogate outcomes, with longer follow-up periods, larger sample size and more standardized procedural methods are necessary to clarify the utility of this procedure in this population.
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.