Khagendra Dahal1, Maria Khan2, Najam Siddiqui2, George Mina2, Pavan Katikaneni2, Kalgi Modi2, Michael Azrin3, Juyong Lee4. 1. Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, LA, United States of America; Division of Interventional Cardiology, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, CT, United States of America. 2. Division of Cardiology, Department of Medicine, Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center, Shreveport, LA, United States of America. 3. Division of Interventional Cardiology, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, CT, United States of America. 4. Division of Interventional Cardiology, University of Connecticut Health Center, Farmington, CT, United States of America. Electronic address: jlee@uchc.edu.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Sympathetic renal denervation (RD) can potentially reduce blood pressure (BP) in people with resistant hypertension (RH) and uncontrolled hypertension (UH). While a large sham-controlled trial (SCT) showed similar outcomes of RD vs. sham control, in the recent trials, RD was effective in reducing BP in hypertensive people. We performed a meta-analysis of SCTs of RD vs. sham in hypertensive patients. METHODS: Multiple electronic databases were searched since inception through September 2018 for SCTs that compared RD vs. sham. Change in 24-hour, daytime and nighttime ambulatory and office BP were efficacy outcomes. Various adverse events were safety outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 7 SCTs were included in the analysis. RD vs. sham significantly reduced 24-hour ambulatory SBP by 3.45 mmHg [95% CI (-5.01, -1.88); P < 0.0001] and DBP by 1.87 mmHg [(-3.59, -0.15); P = 0.01], office DBP by 2.97 mmHg [(-4.76, -1.18); P = 0.001] and daytime ambulatory SBP by 4.03 mmHg [(-6.37, -1.68); P = 0.0008] and DBP by 1.53 mmHg [(-2.69, -0.37); P = 0.01]. RD vs. sham caused non-significant reduction in office SBP by 3.99 mmHg [(-8.10, 0.11); P = 0.06] and nighttime ambulatory SBP by 3.05 mmHg [(-6.86, 0.75), P = 0.12] and DBP by 1.03 mmHg [(-3.01, 0.96); P = 0.31]. There was no difference in the risk of hypertensive crisis/emergency [0.62; 0.24-1.60; P = 0.33] between the two strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Current meta-analysis shows that RD reduces ambulatory BP and office DBP in patients with hypertension. Future trials with longer follow-up should confirm these findings.
INTRODUCTION: Sympathetic renal denervation (RD) can potentially reduce blood pressure (BP) in people with resistant hypertension (RH) and uncontrolled hypertension (UH). While a large sham-controlled trial (SCT) showed similar outcomes of RD vs. sham control, in the recent trials, RD was effective in reducing BP in hypertensivepeople. We performed a meta-analysis of SCTs of RD vs. sham in hypertensivepatients. METHODS: Multiple electronic databases were searched since inception through September 2018 for SCTs that compared RD vs. sham. Change in 24-hour, daytime and nighttime ambulatory and office BP were efficacy outcomes. Various adverse events were safety outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 7 SCTs were included in the analysis. RD vs. sham significantly reduced 24-hour ambulatory SBP by 3.45 mmHg [95% CI (-5.01, -1.88); P < 0.0001] and DBP by 1.87 mmHg [(-3.59, -0.15); P = 0.01], office DBP by 2.97 mmHg [(-4.76, -1.18); P = 0.001] and daytime ambulatory SBP by 4.03 mmHg [(-6.37, -1.68); P = 0.0008] and DBP by 1.53 mmHg [(-2.69, -0.37); P = 0.01]. RD vs. sham caused non-significant reduction in office SBP by 3.99 mmHg [(-8.10, 0.11); P = 0.06] and nighttime ambulatory SBP by 3.05 mmHg [(-6.86, 0.75), P = 0.12] and DBP by 1.03 mmHg [(-3.01, 0.96); P = 0.31]. There was no difference in the risk of hypertensive crisis/emergency [0.62; 0.24-1.60; P = 0.33] between the two strategies. CONCLUSIONS: Current meta-analysis shows that RD reduces ambulatory BP and office DBP in patients with hypertension. Future trials with longer follow-up should confirm these findings.