ReviewBioelectronic medicine2025
A scoping review of neuromodulation techniques for controlling blood pressure: what are the ups and downs to this approach?
Review in Bioelectronic medicine, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND
objectivesWhile there has been rapid progress in research aimed at developing device-based neuromodulation therapies for blood pressure (BP) disorders, there is a paucity of FDA-approved therapies. Currently, the only approved devices for treating resistant hypertension use renal denervation, however, this could soon change as clinical research progresses. With the evolution of interventional strategies for BP regulation, it is important to comprehend the developments to date in order to gauge directions for future research. The objective of this scoping review was to provide the current range of device-based BP neuromodulation approaches, overview salient characteristics of the included studies, address limitations, and detail avenues of further investigation.
methodsOur review was conducted using the Preferred Reporting Items for Reviews and and Meta-analysis framework. The literature search was performed across the Web of Science Core Collection, Scopus, and Pubmed databases. The search yielded 3503 studies, of which 100 studies remained following the screening process. In the last 10 years, there has been an increase in the number of experimental neurostimulation studies detailing increases and decreases in BP. Of all the included studies, most adopted a non-randomized experimental approach (89%), used animal participants (65%), used invasive neuromodulation methods (74%), and performed acute experiments (84%). More studies documented only depressor responses (49%) compared to pressor responses (35%), and 13% reported both pressor and depressor responses using multiple neural targets.
conclusionsThis review addressed developments in device-based BP neuromodulation, highlighting a dominant focus on treating resistant hypertension compared to hypotensive disorders. While advancements in implantable electrodes have improved spatial selectivity of stimulation, non-invasive neurostimulation devices have become increasingly popular in recent years.
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.