Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29374335›Full record

ArticleEJNMMI research2018

Renal sympathetic nerve activity after catheter-based renal denervation.

Linn C Dobrowolski, Daan W Eeftinck Schattenkerk, C T Paul Krediet, Peter M Van Brussel, Liffert Vogt, Frederike J Bemelman, Jim A Reekers, Bert-Jan H Van Den Born, Hein J Verberne

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in EJNMMI research, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Application ofAmerican journal of translational research · 2026
    Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

Linn C DobrowolskiDepartment of Internal Medicine - Nephrology and Kidney Transplantation, Academic Medical Center at the University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Daan W Eeftinck SchattenkerkDepartment of Internal Medicine - Vascular Medicine, Academic Medical Center at the University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
C T Paul KredietDepartment of Internal Medicine - Nephrology and Kidney Transplantation, Academic Medical Center at the University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Peter M Van BrusselDepartment of Cardiology, Academic Medical Center at the University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Liffert VogtDepartment of Internal Medicine - Nephrology and Kidney Transplantation, Academic Medical Center at the University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Frederike J BemelmanDepartment of Internal Medicine - Nephrology and Kidney Transplantation, Academic Medical Center at the University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Jim A ReekersDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, F2-238 Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105, AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Bert-Jan H Van Den BornDepartment of Internal Medicine - Vascular Medicine, Academic Medical Center at the University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Hein J VerberneDepartment of Radiology and Nuclear Medicine, F2-238 Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Meibergdreef 9, 1105, AZ, Amsterdam, The Netherlands. h.j.verberne@amc.uva.nl.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundCatheter-based renal sympathetic denervation (RDN) has been considered a potential treatment for therapy resistant hypertension (RHT). However, in a randomized placebo-controlled trial, RDN did not lead to a substantial blood pressure (BP) reduction. We hypothesized that variation in the reported RDN efficacy might be explained by incomplete nerve disruption as assessed by renal

methodsIn 21 RHT patients (median age 60 years), we performed

resultsAfter RDN office-based systolic BP decreased from 172 to 153 mmHg (p = 0.036), while diastolic office BP (p = 0.531), mean 24 h systolic and diastolic BP (p = 0.602, p = 0.369, respectively), PRA (p = 0.409) and plasma catecholamines (p = 0.324) did not significantly change post-RDN. Following RDN,

conclusionsNo changes were observed in renal

Indexed as

HypertensionRadionuclide imagingRenal catheter ablationRenal nervesSympathetic nerve activity

Identifiers

PMID29374335
PMCPMC5786599

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.