Roland E Schmieder1,2, Karin Högerl3, Susanne Jung4, Peter Bramlage5, Roland Veelken3,6, Christian Ott4,6. 1. Department of Nephrology and Hypertension, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-University, Erlangen-Nuremberg, Ulmenweg 18, 91054, Erlangen, Germany. roland.schmieder@uk-erlangen.de. 2. Institute of Preventive Medicine, Hospital Nuremberg and University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-University, Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany. roland.schmieder@uk-erlangen.de. 3. Institute of Preventive Medicine, Hospital Nuremberg and University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-University, Erlangen-Nuremberg, Erlangen, Germany. 4. Department of Nephrology and Hypertension, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-University, Erlangen-Nuremberg, Ulmenweg 18, 91054, Erlangen, Germany. 5. Institute for Pharmacology and Preventive Medicine, Cloppenburg, Germany. 6. Paracelsus Medical School, Nuremberg, Germany.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Hypertension is poorly controlled in numerous patients despite effective medication being available. Catheter-based renal denervation (RDN) has emerged as an alternative treatment option. We aimed to assess how likely patients with elevated blood pressure (BP) are to accept RDN as treatment option. METHODS: A questionnaire-based cross-sectional survey was performed in patients with elevated BP in Germany. Data on patient demographics, clinical characteristics and treatment preferences were collected, anonymized and analyzed. RESULTS: One thousand and eleven patients completed the survey. Mean age was 66 years (55% male). If not already on medication (n = 172), 38.2% of patients would prefer RDN. Of those already on drug therapy (n = 839), 28.2% would opt for RDN. Patients who were pro-RDN were younger (p < 0.0001) and more often male (p < 0.0001). Nineteen percent would choose RDN if it lowered systolic BP by at least 20 mmHg, more than 40% if they did not have to take any more pills thereafter, and 30% if it would lower BP by at least 10 mmHg. Experiences of side effects and drug adherence were identified as determinants of patient preference. Physicians were the main source of information regarding medical problems (95.5%) and influence patients' decision regarding therapies (98%). CONCLUSIONS: This survey found that a significant proportion of patients would choose catheter-based RDN over lifelong pharmacotherapy. These patients were younger and more likely to be male but their expectation of the extent of BP decrease with RDN was high. Physicians are key mediators for treatment selection. They need to incorporate patient preferences into shared decision making.
BACKGROUND:Hypertension is poorly controlled in numerous patients despite effective medication being available. Catheter-based renal denervation (RDN) has emerged as an alternative treatment option. We aimed to assess how likely patients with elevated blood pressure (BP) are to accept RDN as treatment option. METHODS: A questionnaire-based cross-sectional survey was performed in patients with elevated BP in Germany. Data on patient demographics, clinical characteristics and treatment preferences were collected, anonymized and analyzed. RESULTS: One thousand and eleven patients completed the survey. Mean age was 66 years (55% male). If not already on medication (n = 172), 38.2% of patients would prefer RDN. Of those already on drug therapy (n = 839), 28.2% would opt for RDN. Patients who were pro-RDN were younger (p < 0.0001) and more often male (p < 0.0001). Nineteen percent would choose RDN if it lowered systolic BP by at least 20 mmHg, more than 40% if they did not have to take any more pills thereafter, and 30% if it would lower BP by at least 10 mmHg. Experiences of side effects and drug adherence were identified as determinants of patient preference. Physicians were the main source of information regarding medical problems (95.5%) and influence patients' decision regarding therapies (98%). CONCLUSIONS: This survey found that a significant proportion of patients would choose catheter-based RDN over lifelong pharmacotherapy. These patients were younger and more likely to be male but their expectation of the extent of BP decrease with RDN was high. Physicians are key mediators for treatment selection. They need to incorporate patient preferences into shared decision making.
Authors: Annemiek F Hoogerwaard; Mark R de Jong; Ahmet Adiyaman; Jaap Jan J Smit; Peter Paul H M Delnoy; Jan-Evert Heeg; Boudewijn A A M van Hasselt; Anand R Ramdat Misier; Michiel Rienstra; Isabelle C van Gelder; Arif Elvan Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2018-06-25 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Dena Ettehad; Connor A Emdin; Amit Kiran; Simon G Anderson; Thomas Callender; Jonathan Emberson; John Chalmers; Anthony Rodgers; Kazem Rahimi Journal: Lancet Date: 2015-12-24 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Michel Azizi; Roland E Schmieder; Felix Mahfoud; Michael A Weber; Joost Daemen; Justin Davies; Jan Basile; Ajay J Kirtane; Yale Wang; Melvin D Lobo; Manish Saxena; Lida Feyz; Florian Rader; Philipp Lurz; Jeremy Sayer; Marc Sapoval; Terry Levy; Kintur Sanghvi; Josephine Abraham; Andrew S P Sharp; Naomi D L Fisher; Michael J Bloch; Helen Reeve-Stoffer; Leslie Coleman; Christopher Mullin; Laura Mauri Journal: Lancet Date: 2018-05-23 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Deepak L Bhatt; David E Kandzari; William W O'Neill; Ralph D'Agostino; John M Flack; Barry T Katzen; Martin B Leon; Minglei Liu; Laura Mauri; Manuela Negoita; Sidney A Cohen; Suzanne Oparil; Krishna Rocha-Singh; Raymond R Townsend; George L Bakris Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2014-03-29 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Felix Mahfoud; Roland E Schmieder; Michel Azizi; Atul Pathak; Horst Sievert; Costas Tsioufis; Thomas Zeller; Stefan Bertog; Peter J Blankestijn; Michael Böhm; Michel Burnier; Gilles Chatellier; Isabelle Durand Zaleski; Sebastian Ewen; Guido Grassi; Michael Joner; Sverre E Kjeldsen; Melvin D Lobo; Chaim Lotan; Thomas Felix Lüscher; Gianfranco Parati; Patrick Rossignol; Luis Ruilope; Faisal Sharif; Evert van Leeuwen; Massimo Volpe; Stephan Windecker; Adam Witkowski; William Wijns Journal: Eur Heart J Date: 2017-11-21 Impact factor: 29.983
Authors: Lukas Stoiber; Felix Mahfoud; Seyedeh Mahsa Zamani; Tomas Lapinskas; Michael Böhm; Sebastian Ewen; Saarraaken Kulenthiran; Markus P Schlaich; Murray D Esler; Tommy Hammer; Knut Haakon Stensæth; Burkert Pieske; Stephan Dreysse; Eckart Fleck; Titus Kühne; Marcus Kelm; Philipp Stawowy; Sebastian Kelle Journal: Clin Res Cardiol Date: 2018-03-08 Impact factor: 5.460
Authors: Raymond R Townsend; Felix Mahfoud; David E Kandzari; Kazuomi Kario; Stuart Pocock; Michael A Weber; Sebastian Ewen; Konstantinos Tsioufis; Dimitrios Tousoulis; Andrew S P Sharp; Anthony F Watkinson; Roland E Schmieder; Axel Schmid; James W Choi; Cara East; Anthony Walton; Ingrid Hopper; Debbie L Cohen; Robert Wilensky; David P Lee; Adrian Ma; Chandan M Devireddy; Janice P Lea; Philipp C Lurz; Karl Fengler; Justin Davies; Neil Chapman; Sidney A Cohen; Vanessa DeBruin; Martin Fahy; Denise E Jones; Martin Rothman; Michael Böhm Journal: Lancet Date: 2017-08-28 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Lucas Lauder; Milan A Wolf; Sean S Scholz; Mathias Hohl; Felix Mahfoud; Michael Böhm Journal: Curr Cardiol Rep Date: 2019-07-05 Impact factor: 2.931
Authors: V J M Zeijen; A A Kroon; B H van den Born; P J Blankestijn; S C A Meijvis; A Nap; E Lipsic; A Elvan; J Versmissen; R J van Geuns; M Voskuil; P A L Tonino; W Spiering; J Deinum; J Daemen Journal: Neth Heart J Date: 2022-08-24 Impact factor: 2.854
Authors: Roland E Schmieder; David E Kandzari; Tzung-Dau Wang; Ying-Hsiang Lee; Gabriel Lazarus; Atul Pathak Journal: J Hypertens Date: 2021-01 Impact factor: 4.776