Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42261277›Full record

ReviewClinical hypertension2026

Renal denervation revisited: is patient selection the missing link between failure and success?

Ehsan Shahverdi, Lars Roman Herda, Rojen Manouchehri, Sendooran Shahi, Mathias Lange

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Clinical hypertension, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

5 authors.

Ehsan ShahverdiDepartment of Cardiology, Rhythmology, Angiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Heart Center Osnabrück, Hospital Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4713-292X
Lars Roman HerdaDepartment of Emergency Medicine, Clemenshospital Münster, Ludgerus-Kliniken Münster GmbH, Academic Teaching Hospital of the University of Münster, Münster, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0003-5123-6988
Rojen ManouchehriSchool of Medicine, Tehran Medical Sciences Branch, Islamic Azad University, Tehran, Iran.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0820-8960
Sendooran ShahiDepartment of Cardiology, Rhythmology, Angiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Heart Center Osnabrück, Hospital Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0009-9805-0359
Mathias LangeDepartment of Cardiology, Rhythmology, Angiology and Intensive Care Medicine, Heart Center Osnabrück, Hospital Osnabrück, Osnabrück, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1612-218X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Renal denervation (RDN) has re-emerged as a therapeutic option for hypertension following contemporary sham-controlled randomized trials demonstrating modest but consistent blood pressure (BP) reductions. Despite these advances, substantial heterogeneity in treatment response persists, sustaining debate regarding the clinical value and appropriate role of RDN. Increasing evidence suggests that patient-related factors, rather than device technology alone, may critically determine therapeutic success. This narrative review synthesizes evidence from randomized clinical trials, meta-analyses, and key observational studies published between 2009 and 2024. Relevant literature was identified through searches of PubMed, Embase, and major cardiovascular society publications. We evaluated the influence of hypertension phenotype, baseline BP, medication adherence, sympathetic nervous system activity, renal artery anatomy, and comorbid conditions on BP response to RDN. Accumulating data indicate that response to RDN is highly variable and strongly influenced by patient-specific characteristics. Sustained hypertension confirmed by ambulatory BP monitoring, higher baseline BP, features suggestive of sympathetic overactivity, favorable renal artery anatomy, and challenges with long-term medication adherence are consistently associated with greater BP reduction. In contrast, pseudoresistance, white-coat hypertension, advanced arterial stiffness, and unfavorable anatomy are linked to attenuated or inconsistent responses. Reassessment of sham-controlled trials highlights that observed BP reductions, although modest, are clinically meaningful when appropriately contextualized. The efficacy of RDN is highly context-dependent and should not be viewed as universal or ineffective. By shifting from a device-centered paradigm to mechanism-based patient phenotyping, RDN may be more accurately positioned as a targeted, adjunctive therapy within personalized hypertension management. A structured framework for patient selection may help reconcile prior controversies, optimize clinical implementation, and inform the design of future trials.

Indexed as

Ambulatory blood pressure monitoringHypertensionPatient selectionPersonalized medicineRenal denervationResistant hypertensionSham-controlled trialsSympathetic nervous system

Identifiers

PMID42261277
PMCPMC13242965

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.