ArticleEClinicalMedicine2024
Efficacy and safety of sympathetic mapping and ablation of renal nerves for the treatment of hypertension (SMART): 6-month follow-up of a randomised, controlled trial.
Article in EClinicalMedicine, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 2 of them syntheses 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
17 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- The Efficacy and Safety of Different Ways of Renal Denervation for Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.Journal of clinical hypertension (Greenwich, Conn.) · 2025Pooled it
- Renal Denervation Effects on Blood Pressure in Resistant and Uncontrolled Hypertension: A Meta-Analysis of Sham-Controlled Randomized Clinical Trials.Clinical cardiology · 2025Pooled it
- Safety and efficacy of alcohol-mediated bilateral adrenal artery embolization in patients with idiopathic hyperaldosteronism: a 6-month follow-up of a randomized controlled trial.Journal of human hypertension · 2025Trial
- Catheter-Based Renal Denervation in Uncontrolled and Resistant Hypertension: Evidence, Guidelines, Special Populations and Clinical Implementation.Journal of cardiovascular development and disease · 2026Review
- Kidney Denervation: Latest Breakthroughs and Insights.Clinical journal of the American Society of Nephrology : CJASN · 2026Review
- Overcoming variable response in renal denervation: Key strategies for reliable clinical implementation.Hypertension research : official journal of the Japanese Society of Hypertension · 2026Review
- Recent update on renal denervation: where do we stand now?Clinical hypertension · 2026Review
- Renal Denervation in Asia: 2025 Asia Renal Denervation Consortium (ARDeC) Consensus Statement Endorsed by the Hypertension Cardiovascular Outcome Prevention and Evidence in Asia (HOPE Asia) Network.Hypertension (Dallas, Tex. : 1979) · 2026Review
- Closed-loop bioelectronic block of stellate ganglia reduces neurotransmitter release and improves recovery following programmed ventricular pacing.Frontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Resistant hypertension: Epidemiology, mechanisms and contemporary therapeutic strategies.Heart international · 2026Review
- Sympathetic Vasomotion Reflects Catheter-Based Radiofrequency Renal Denervation.Hypertension (Dallas, Tex. : 1979) · 2025Article
- The Role of Renal Denervation in HFpEF.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- Renal Denervation After USA FDA Approval: An Update from an Interventional Cardiologist's Perspective.Journal of clinical medicine · 2025Review
- The road to renal denervation for hypertension and beyond (HF): two decades of failed, succeeded, and to be determined.Heart failure reviews · 2025Review
- Preclinical Evaluation of a Novel Cryo Renal Denervation System.JACC. Basic to translational science · 2025Article
- Recent Advances in Renal Denervation Therapy and Novel Applications of High-Intensity Focused Ultrasound.Cardiovascular therapeutics · 2025Review
- Medication Changes After Renal Denervation: Current Evidence and Patient Perspectives.Journal of the American Heart Association · 2024Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
32 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: Previous trials of renal denervation (RDN) have been designed to investigate reduction of blood pressure (BP) as the primary efficacy endpoint using non-selective RDN without intraoperatively verified RDN success. It is an unmet clinical need to map renal nerves, selectively denervate renal sympathetic nerves, provide readouts for the interventionalists and avoid futile RDN. We aimed to examine the safety and efficacy of renal nerve mapping/selective renal denervation (msRDN) in patients with uncontrolled hypertension (HTN) and determine whether antihypertensive drug burden is reduced while office systolic BP (OSBP) is controlled to target level (<140 mmHg). Methods: We conducted a randomized, prospective, multicenter, single-blinded, sham-controlled trial. The study combined two efficacy endpoints at 6 months as primary outcomes: The control rate of patients with OSBP <140 mmHg (non-inferior outcome) and change in the composite index of antihypertensive drugs (Drug Index) in the treatment versus Sham group (superior outcome). This design avoids confounding from excess drug-taking in the Sham group. Antihypertensive drug burden was assessed by a composite index constructed as: Class N (number of classes of antihypertensive drugs) × (sum of doses). 15 hospitals in China participated in the study and 220 patients were enrolled in a 1:1 ratio (msRDN vs Sham). The key inclusion criteria included: age (18-65 years old), history of essential HTN (at least 6 months), heart rate (≥70 bpm), OSBP (≥150 mmHg and ≤180 mmHg), ambulatory BP monitoring (ABPM, 24-h SBP ≥130 mmHg or daytime SBP ≥135 mmHg or nighttime SBP ≥120 mmHg), renal artery stenosis (<50%) and renal function (eGFR >45 mL/min/1.73 m Findings: Between July 8, 2016 and February 23, 2022, 611 patients were consented, 220 patients were enrolled in the study who received standardized antihypertensive drug treatments (at least two drugs) for at least 28 days, presented OSBP ≥150 mmHg and ≤180 mmHg and met all inclusion and exclusion criteria. In left RA and right RA, mapped sites were 8.2 (3.0) and 8.0 (2.7), hot/ablated sites were 3.7 (1.4) and 4.0 (1.6), cold spots were 2.4 (2.6) and 2.0 (2.2), neutral spots were 2.0 (2.1) and 2.0 (2.1), respectively. Hot, cold and neutral spots was 48.0%, 27.5% and 24.4% of total mapped sites, respectively. At 6 M, the Control Rate of OSBP was comparable between msRDN and Sham group (95.4% vs 92.8%, p = 0.429), achieved non-inferiority margin -10% (2.69%; 95% CI -4.11%, 9.83%, p < 0.001 for non-inferiority); the change in Drug Index was significantly lower in msRDN group compared to Sham group (4.37 (6.65) vs 7.61 (10.31), p = 0.010) and superior to Sham group (-3.25; 95% CI -5.56, -0.94, p = 0.003), indicating msRDN patients need significantly fewer drugs to control OSBP <140 mmHg. 24-hour ambulatory SBP decreased from 146.8 (13.9) mmHg by 10.8 (14.1) mmHg, and from 149.8 (12.8) mmHg by 10.0 (14.0) mmHg in msRDN and Sham groups, respectively (p < 0.001 from Baseline; p > 0.05 between groups). Safety profiles were comparable between msRDN and Sham groups, demonstrating the safety and efficacy of renal mapping/selective RDN to treat uncontrolled HTN. Interpretation: The msRDN therapy achieved the goals of reducing the drug burden of HTN patients and controlling OSBP <140 mmHg, with only approximately four targeted ablations per renal main artery, much lower than in previous trials. Funding: SyMap Medical (Suzhou), LTD, Suzhou, China.
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.