Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38046011›Full record

ReviewClinical kidney journal2023

Late outcomes of renal denervation are more favourable than early ones: facts or fancies?

Alexandre Persu, Maria S Stoenoiu, Frédéric Maes, Reinhold Kreutz, Giuseppe Mancia, Sverre E Kjeldsen

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical kidney journal, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Medical Measures in Hypertensives Considered Resistant.American journal of hypertension · 2024
    Article
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

6 authors.

Alexandre PersuDivision of Cardiology, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc Université Catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4007-9695
Maria S StoenoiuDepartment of Internal Medicine, Rheumatology, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc, Institut de Recherche Expérimentale et Clinique, Université catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium.
Frédéric MaesDivision of Cardiology, Cliniques Universitaires Saint-Luc Université Catholique de Louvain, Brussels, Belgium.
Reinhold KreutzCharité - Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Institute of Clinical Pharmacology and Toxicology, Berlin, Germany.
Giuseppe ManciaUniversity Milano-Bicocca, Milan, Italy.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0942-3176
Sverre E KjeldsenInstitute of Clinical Medicine, University of Oslo, Departments of Cardiology and Nephrology, Ullevaal Hospital, Oslo, Norway.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Following second-generation randomized trials, there is evidence that renal denervation (RDN) decreases blood pressure (BP), although to a lesser extent than suggested in the initial controlled and observational studies. The recent publication of the 36-month follow-up of the Symplicity HTN-3 trial has raised expectations, suggesting increasing, late benefits of the procedure, despite initially negative results. These findings come after those obtained at 36 months in the sham-controlled trial SPYRAL HTN-ON MED and in the Global Symplicity Registry. However, they are susceptible to biases inherent in observational studies (after unblinding for sham-control) and non-random, substantial attrition of treatment groups at 36 months, and used interpolation of missing BPs. More importantly, in SPYRAL HTN-ON MED and Symplicity HTN-3, long-term BP changes in patients from the initial RDN group were compared with those in a heterogeneous control group, including both control patients who did not benefit from RDN and patients who eventually crossed over to RDN. In crossover patients, the last BP before RDN was imputed to subsequent follow-up. In Symplicity HTN-3, this particular approach led to the claim of increasing long-term benefits of RDN. However, comparison of BP changes in patients from the RDN group and control patients who did not undergo RDN, without imputation of BPs from crossover patients, does not support this view. The good news is that despite the suggestion of sympathetic nerve regrowth after RDN in some animal models, there is no strong signal in favour of a decreasing effect of RDN over time, up to 24 or even 36 months. Still, current data do not support a long-term increase in the effect of RDN and the durability of RDN-related BP reduction remains to be formally demonstrated.

Indexed as

Global Symplicity Registrylong-term benefitsrenal denervationSPYRAL HTN-ON MEDSymplicity HTN-3

Identifiers

PMID38046011
PMCPMC10689164

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.