Literature DB >> 32528562

Efficacy and safety of renal denervation in addition to pulmonary vein isolation for atrial fibrillation and hypertension-Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

Raymond Pranata1, Rachel Vania1, Sunu Budhi Raharjo2.   

Abstract

INTRODUCTION: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the latest evidence on the use of renal denervation (RDN) + pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) compared to PVI alone for treating atrial fibrillation (AF) with hypertension.
METHODS: A systematic literature search from several electronic databases was performed up until January 2020. The primary outcome was AF recurrence defined as AF/atrial flutter (AFL)/atrial tachycardia (AT) ≥30 seconds at 12-month follow-up and the secondary outcome was procedure-related complications.
RESULTS: There were 568 subjects from five studies. AF recurrence was 90/280 (32.1%) in the RDN + PVI group and 142/274 (51.8%) in the PVI group. RDN + PVI was associated with a lower incidence of AF recurrence (RR 0.62 [0.51, 076], P < .001; I 2: 0%). Pooled analysis of HR showed that RDN + PVI was associated with reduced AF recurrence (HR 0.51 [0.38, 0.70], P < .001; I 2: 0%). Complications were 7/241 (2.9%) in the RDN + PVI group and 8/237 (3.4%) in the PVI group. The rate of complications between the groups was similar (RR 0.87 [0.33, 2.29], P = .77; I 2: 0%). In the subgroup analysis of paroxysmal AF, RDN + PVI was shown to reduce AF recurrence (RR 0.64 [0.49, 0.82], P < .001; I 2: 0% and HR 0.56 [0.38, 0.82], P = .003; I 2: 0%) compared to PVI alone. RDN + PVI has a moderate certainty of evidence in the reducing AF recurrence with an absolute reduction of 197 fewer per 1000 (from 254 fewer to 124 fewer).
CONCLUSION: RDN in addition to PVI, is associated with reduced 12-month AF recurrence and similar procedure-related complications compared to PVI alone.
© 2020 The Authors. Journal of Arrhythmia published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Japanese Heart Rhythm Society.

Entities:  

Keywords:  atrial fibrillation; atrial fibrillation recurrence; catheter ablation; pulmonary vein isolation; renal denervation

Year:  2020        PMID: 32528562      PMCID: PMC7279983          DOI: 10.1002/joa3.12353

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Arrhythm        ISSN: 1880-4276


INTRODUCTION

Atrial fibrillation (AF) and hypertension are highly prevalent diseases that frequently coexist. , Hypertension increases the risk of AF, and uncontrolled hypertension has been shown to be an independent predictor of AF recurrence postablation. Despite improvement in technologies, the rate of AF recurrence postablation remained high, , , and uncontrolled hypertension poses as an additional problem. Overactivation of the renin‐angiotensin‐aldosterone system (RAAS) leads to a heightened sympathetic tone, which in turn stimulates renin synthesis. An enhanced RAAS leads to remodeling along myocardium and vasculature, promoting arterial hypertension and left atrial remodeling. Renal denervation (RDN) may attenuate the hyperactive sympathetic nervous system which in turn leads to a reduction in RAAS activation and lowering of blood pressure. , RDN with or without PVI has been shown to reduce AF burden in hypertensive patients. , Hence, RDN as an additional intervention to PVI is potentially advantageous to lower blood pressure (especially in uncontrolled hypertension) and reduce the incidence of AF recurrence. This systematic review and meta‐analysis aimed to assess the latest evidence on the use of RDN + pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) compared to PVI alone for treating atrial fibrillation with hypertension.

METHODS

Search strategy

We performed a systematic literature search on topics that compare the use of RDN in addition to PVI and PVI alone for hypertensive AF patients undergoing catheter ablation with keywords [“renal denervation” and “ablation” and “atrial fibrillation”] and its synonym from inception up until January 2020 through PubMed, EuropePMC, Cochrane Central Database, ScienceDirect, ProQuest, ClinicalTrials.gov, and hand‐sampling from potential articles cited by other studies. The records were then systematically evaluated using inclusion and exclusion criteria. We also perform hand‐sampling from references of the included studies. Two researchers independently performed the initial search and discrepancies were resolved by discussion. A Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta‐Analyses (PRISMA) flowchart of the literature search strategy of studies was presented in Figure 1.
FIGURE 1

Study flow diagram

Study flow diagram

Selection criteria

The inclusion criteria for this study are studies that compare the use of RDN in addition to PVI and PVI alone for hypertensive AF patients undergoing catheter ablation. We include RCTs and exclude observational studies, animal studies, case reports, review articles, and non‐English language articles.

Data extraction

Data extraction and quality assessment were done by two independent authors using a standardized extraction form that includes the first author, the year of publication, study design, sample size, AF recurrence/freedom, complications, paroxysmal AF, age, gender, baseline systolic blood pressure, and follow‐up duration. The primary outcome was AF recurrence defined as the presence of AF/AFL/AT ≥30 seconds at 12‐month follow‐up and the secondary outcome was procedure‐related complications.

Statistical analysis

To perform the meta‐analysis, we used RevMan version 5.3 software (Cochrane Collaboration). Risk ratios (RRs) were used for pooled effect estimate of dichotomous data, the hazard ratio (HR) was used for pooled effect estimate for HR, and their 95% confidence interval. Inconsistency index (I2) test, which ranges from 0% to 100%, was used to assess heterogeneity across studies. A value above 50% or P < .10 indicates statistically significant heterogeneity. We used the Mantel‐Haenzsel method to calculate RRs and generic inverse variance to calculate pooled HR using a random‐effects model for meta‐analysis regardless of heterogeneity. Subgroup analysis was performed to evaluate outcome in patients with paroxysmal AF. All P values were two‐tailed with a statistical significance set at 0.05 or below. Cochrane risk‐of‐bias tool for randomized trials (Cochrane Collaboration) will be used to assess the risk of bias. The certainty of evidence was assessed using Guideline Development Tool by GRADEpro GDT (McMaster University and Evidence Prime Inc.).

RESULTS

Study selection and characteristics

We found a total of 924 results, and 692 records remained after the removal of duplicates. 678 records were excluded after screening the title/abstracts. After assessing 14 full‐text for eligibility, we excluded nine because (a) Nonrandomized studies (n = 2), (b) Single‐arm studies (n = 4), (c) Without ablation (n = 1) and (d) Trial Protocol (n = 2). We included five studies in qualitative synthesis and five in meta‐analysis (Figure 1). There were a total of 568 subjects from five studies , , , , (Table 1).
Table 1

Summary of the included studies

AuthorStudy designSample size (RDN + PVI/PVI)Inclusion criteriaPrimary outcome (recurrence or freedom)Definition of recurrenceParoxysmal AF (%)Age, years (Mean ± SD)Male (%)Baseline systolic BP (mm Hg)Follow‐up period
Steinberg 2019RCT302 (154/148)

Paroxysmal AF + Hypertension (≥1 antihypertensive drugs)

undergoing cryoballoon PVI

12 months AF/AFL/AT with 3 months

blanking period; without AAD after blanking period

AF/AFL/AT

≥30 seconds

10059 (54‐65) vs 60 (58‐65)59.1 vs 61.5150 ± 9 vs 151 ± 912 months
Kiuchi 2018RCT69 (33/36)

Paroxysmal

AF + Uncontrolled hypertension (≥3 antihypertensive drugs) +

+ CKD + dual‐chamber pacemaker undergoing PVI

12 months AF with 3 months

blanking period

AF

≥30 seconds

10056.8 ± 6.5 vs 58.4 ± 5.176 vs 83142 ± 6 vs 140 ± 612 months
Romanov 2017RCT76 (39/37)

Paroxysmal/Persistent AF + drug‐resistant

hypertension (≥3 antihypertensive drugs) undergoing PVI

12 months AF with 3 months

blanking period; without AAD after blanking period

Unclear38.5 vs 43.256 ± 6 vs 56 ± 574.3 vs 70.2163 ± 20 vs 164 ± 1612 months
 Pokushalov 2014RCT80 (41/39)

Paroxysmal/Persistent AF + drug‐resistant

hypertension (≥3 antihypertensive drugs) undergoing PVI

12 months AF/AFL/AT with 3 months

blanking period; without AAD after blanking period

AF/AFL/AT

>30 seconds

41.5 vs 46.256 ± 6 vs 56 ± 675.6 vs 61.5163 ± 18 vs 164 ± 1712 months
Pokushalov 2012RCT41 (14/13)

Paroxysmal/Persistent AF + drug‐resistant

hypertension (≥3 antihypertensive drugs) undergoing PVI

12 months AF/AFL/AT with 3 months

blanking period; without AAD after blanking period

AF/AFL/AT

>30 seconds

30.8 vs 35.757 ± 8 vs 56 ± 984.6 vs 71.4181 ± 7 vs 178 ± 812 months

Abbreviations: AAD, antiarrhythmic drugs; AF, atrial fibrillation; AFL, atrial flutter; AT, atrial tachycardia; PVI, pulmonary vein isolation; RCT, randomized controlled trial; RDN, renal denervation.

Summary of the included studies Paroxysmal AF + Hypertension (≥1 antihypertensive drugs) undergoing cryoballoon PVI 12 months AF/AFL/AT with 3 months blanking period; without AAD after blanking period AF/AFL/AT ≥30 seconds Paroxysmal AF + Uncontrolled hypertension (≥3 antihypertensive drugs) + + CKD + dual‐chamber pacemaker undergoing PVI 12 months AF with 3 months blanking period AF ≥30 seconds Paroxysmal/Persistent AF + drug‐resistant hypertension (≥3 antihypertensive drugs) undergoing PVI 12 months AF with 3 months blanking period; without AAD after blanking period Paroxysmal/Persistent AF + drug‐resistant hypertension (≥3 antihypertensive drugs) undergoing PVI 12 months AF/AFL/AT with 3 months blanking period; without AAD after blanking period AF/AFL/AT >30 seconds Paroxysmal/Persistent AF + drug‐resistant hypertension (≥3 antihypertensive drugs) undergoing PVI 12 months AF/AFL/AT with 3 months blanking period; without AAD after blanking period AF/AFL/AT >30 seconds Abbreviations: AAD, antiarrhythmic drugs; AF, atrial fibrillation; AFL, atrial flutter; AT, atrial tachycardia; PVI, pulmonary vein isolation; RCT, randomized controlled trial; RDN, renal denervation. All studies enrolled AF patients with hypertension. All studies except Steinberg et al enrolled uncontrolled/drug‐resistant hypertension (≥3 antihypertensive drugs). All studies have RDN + PVI as their intervention group, four studies have PVI alone as the control group, and 1 study (Kiuchi et al) has PVI + spironolactone as their control group. Steinberg et al used cryoballoon for PVI, the other studies were unclear. All studies used radiofrequency energy for RDN. All studies assessed AF recurrence for 12 months, the definition for AF recurrence varies but most were AF/AFL/AT ≥30 seconds after initial 3 months blanking period. Steinberg et al and Kiuchi et al only enrolled paroxysmal AF and excluded persistent AF.

Atrial fibrillation recurrence

AF recurrence occurred in 90/280 (32.1%) of the RDN + PVI group and 142/274 (51.8%) of the PVI group. RDN + PVI was associated with a lower incidence of AF recurrence (RR 0.62 [0.51, 0.76], P < .001; I 2: 0%, P = .94) (Figure 2A) Three studies also reported the outcome in form of HR, and the pooled HR showed reduced AF recurrence (HR 0.51 [0.38, 0.70], P < .001; I 2: 0%, P = .74) in patients receiving RDN + PVI (Figure 2B).
FIGURE 2

Primary and secondary outcome. RDN + PVI was shown to be associated with reduced AF recurrence (A and B) compared to PVI alone. There was no statistically significant difference between the rate of complication (C) among the two groups. AF, atrial fibrillation; PVI, pulmonary vein isolation; RDN, renal denervation

Primary and secondary outcome. RDN + PVI was shown to be associated with reduced AF recurrence (A and B) compared to PVI alone. There was no statistically significant difference between the rate of complication (C) among the two groups. AF, atrial fibrillation; PVI, pulmonary vein isolation; RDN, renal denervation

Complications

Complications were 7/241 (2.9%) in the RDN + PVI group and 8/237 (3.4%) in the PVI group out of a total 458 patients from four studies. Procedural complications related to PVI (not clearly defined) were present in seven patients in both groups. There were no complications related to the RDN procedure. The rate of complications between the groups were similar (RR 0.87 [0.33, 2.29], P = .77; I 2: 0%, P = .51) (Figure 2C).

Subgroup analysis

In the subgroup analysis of paroxysmal AF, RDN + PVI was shown to reduce AF recurrence (RR 0.64 [0.49, 0.82], P < .001; I 2: 0%, P = .98) compared to PVI alone (Figure 3A). Pooled analysis of HR showed that RDN + PVI was associated with reduced AF recurrence (HR 0.56 [0.38, 0.82], P = .003; I 2: 0%, P = .77) (Figure 3B).
FIGURE 3

Subgroup analysis on paroxysmal AF. RDN + PVI was shown to be effective in reducing AF recurrence in the paroxysmal AF subgroup (A and B). AF, atrial fibrillation; PVI, pulmonary vein isolation; RDN, renal denervation

Subgroup analysis on paroxysmal AF. RDN + PVI was shown to be effective in reducing AF recurrence in the paroxysmal AF subgroup (A and B). AF, atrial fibrillation; PVI, pulmonary vein isolation; RDN, renal denervation

Risk of bias assessment

The risk of bias was mainly due to performance bias because the operators were not blinded to the groups, due to the fact that the same operator performed both PVI and RDN. (Figure 4A) The risk for selection bias was unclear, the method of randomization and allocation concealment was not clearly defined in some studies. The funnel‐plot was symmetrical for the AF recurrence outcome indicating a low‐risk of publication bias. (Figure 4B).
FIGURE 4

Risk of Bias Assessment. The summary of risk of bias assessment using Cochrane risk‐of‐bias tool for randomized trials was shown in (A). Funnel‐plot analysis demonstrate a relatively symmetrical shape for AF recurrence outcome (B). AF, atrial fibrillation

Risk of Bias Assessment. The summary of risk of bias assessment using Cochrane risk‐of‐bias tool for randomized trials was shown in (A). Funnel‐plot analysis demonstrate a relatively symmetrical shape for AF recurrence outcome (B). AF, atrial fibrillation

GRADE approach

Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) showed a moderate certainty of evidence that RDN in addition to PVI results in the reduction of AF recurrence with an absolute reduction of 197 fewer per 1000 (from 254 fewer to 124 fewer). (Table 2).
Table 2

GRADE approach

Certainty assessmentNumber of patientsEffectCertaintyImportance
No of studiesStudy designRisk of biasInconsistencyIndirectnessImprecisionOther considerationsRDN + PVIPVI onlyRelative (95% CI)Absolute (95% CI)
AF recurrence
5Randomised trialsSerious a Not seriousNot seriousNot seriousNone90/280 (32.1%)142/274 (51.8%)RR 0.62 (0.51‐0.76)197 fewer per 1000 (from 254 fewer to 124 fewer)

⨁⨁⨁◯

MODERATE

CRITICAL

Abbreviations: AF, atrial fibrillation; CI, confidence interval; PVI, pulmonary vein isolation; RDN, renal denervation; RR, risk ratio.

Some studies have unclear randomization; Possible performance bias due to impossible blinding of operators

GRADE approach ⨁⨁⨁◯ MODERATE Abbreviations: AF, atrial fibrillation; CI, confidence interval; PVI, pulmonary vein isolation; RDN, renal denervation; RR, risk ratio. Some studies have unclear randomization; Possible performance bias due to impossible blinding of operators

DISCUSSION

This systematic review and meta‐analysis of RCTs demonstrated that RDN in addition to PVI is associated with reduced 12 months AF recurrence and similar procedure‐related complications compared to PVI alone. The certainty of evidence assessed for the 12 months AF recurrence (moderate certainty) was mainly downgraded due to the risk of bias, nevertheless, inadequate blinding of the healthcare providers may not dramatically impact the effect estimates of RCTs. The autonomic nervous system has been shown to contribute to the initiation and maintenance of AF , due to associated structural and functional remodeling. , Ablating sympathetic nerves present in the renal vasculature reduce systemic and cardiac catecholamine levels, modulates RAAS, and subsequently reduce atrial fibrosis. In animal models, RDN has been shown to reduce catecholamine levels, reverse atrial structural, and electrical remodeling. , In animal ischemic heart failure models, RDN has been shown to reverse structural and electrical remodeling of the atrium along with reduced AF inducibility. RDN has been though to reduce sympathetic overactivity and arrhythmogenic foci/substrate arising from it. RDN alone without PVI has been shown to reduce AF burden and increase the quality of life in patients with AF. Furthermore, RDN in PVI patients was shown to reduce left ventricular septal thickness and posterior wall thickness. , Abnormal interventricular septal thickness has been shown to increase the risk of mortality and stroke in AF patients, and the regression of left ventricular hypertrophy has been hypothesized as a therapeutic target. While shorter diagnosis‐to‐ablation time has been shown to reduce AF recurrence in PVI, it is not known whether time to RDN will influence its potential to reverse the pathology. This meta‐analysis showed that RDN + PVI was associated with reduced AF recurrence. Romanov et al reported that RDN in addition to PVI was independently associated with less AF recurrence. There seemed to be no statistically significant difference between those receiving high‐frequency stimulation compared to those without. Besides the direct attenuation of sympathetic effect on the atrium, RDN has also been shown to reduce AF recurrence through the reduction of BP in patients with uncontrolled/drug‐resistant hypertension. Romanov et al study showed that the AF burden in RDN + PVI was lower compared to PVI only (2.43% vs 6.95%). Their study also showed that the blood pressure reduction was associated with less AF burden as demonstrated by the increase in a mean difference of AF burden between the two groups later in follow‐up period. Furthermore, AF recurrence was also shown to be decreased by a HR of 0.9 with each 5 mm Hg decrease in blood pressure. Kiuchi et al study demonstrated an inverse correlation between blood pressure reduction and AF burden. This is unsurprising because uncontrolled hypertension (despite ≥3 antihypertensive drugs) has been shown to independently increase the risk of AF recurrence post‐ablation, while controlled hypertension did not affect ablation outcome. The aforementioned study found that increased atrial size, nonpulmonary vein triggers, and extensive atrial scars were more frequently found in uncontrolled hypertensive group compared to controlled hypertensive, explaining the higher AF recurrence. Steinberg et al showed that RDN + PVI was associated with reduction in left atrial size which may contribute to a lower AF recurrence. RDN may help to control blood pressure in patients with uncontrolled hypertension on ≥3 antihypertensive medications, and as shown by Romanov et al, apparent benefits in terms of AF recurrence were shown with the blood pressure control. Pokushalov et al (2014) showed that RDN + PVI was effective in persistent AF but not paroxysmal AF, however, this meta‐analysis showed that RDN was also effective in the paroxysmal AF group. Possibly persistent AF has a higher AF recurrence compared to paroxysmal AF in the study, and hence, the sample/event size of paroxysmal AF in Pokushalov et al (2014) study was inadequate to demonstrate significant benefit of RDN. Romanov et al showed that persistent AF was an independent predictor of AF recurrence. As for the safety aspects of the procedure, there was no single complication related to RDN and the was no statistically significant difference in the number of PVI‐related complications among RDN + PVI and PVI alone. Furthermore, Steinberg et al demonstrated that RDN + PVI was associated with reduced hospitalization due to cardiovascular causes but not mortality compared to PVI alone. Improvement of renal function in the RDN + PVI group was also demonstrated in Kiuchi et al study.

Clinical implications

RDN in addition to PVI, has a moderate certainty of evidence to reduce AF recurrence in uncontrolled hypertension. There are no additional procedure‐related complications compared to PVI alone. Hence, RDN might be used in addition to PVI in patients with AF and uncontrolled hypertension (≥3 antihypertensive medications). The benefits in patients with hypertension with ≥1 antihypertensive medication(s) has also been demonstrated by a study.

Limitations

The limitation of this systematic review and meta‐analysis is mainly due to publication bias in which positive studies are more likely to be published than negative studies. Although the funnel‐plot analysis did not indicate publication bias, the number of studies is <10 studies. We tried to mitigate the publication bias by only selecting RCTs which are mostly registered on clinicaltrials.gov/other equivalent bodies as opposed to observational studies. These RCTs, if not publish, may report their results in the clinicaltrials.gov, they also showed prespecified outcome that limits the bias. Due to the limited amount of studies, meta‐regression cannot be performed to assess whether age, gender, persistent AF, or blood pressure reduction influence the effect estimate. Most of the studies reported unadjusted HR for the outcome, hence, a pooled estimate of adjusted HR cannot be performed.

CONCLUSION

RDN in addition to PVI is associated with reduced 12‐month AF recurrence and similar procedure‐related complications compared to PVI alone.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

The authors declare no conflict of interests for this article.

AUTHORS CONTRIBUTION

R.P conceived and designed the study and drafted the manuscript. R.P and R.V acquired the data and drafted the manuscript. R.P and R.V performed data extraction. R.P, R.V and S.B.R interpreted the data, and performed extensive research on the topic. S.B.R reviewed and performed extensive editing of the manuscript. All authors contributed to the writing of the manuscript. R.P performed the statistical analysis.
  27 in total

Review 1.  European Heart Rhythm Association (EHRA)/European Association of Cardiovascular Prevention and Rehabilitation (EACPR) position paper on how to prevent atrial fibrillation endorsed by the Heart Rhythm Society (HRS) and Asia Pacific Heart Rhythm Society (APHRS).

Authors:  Bulent Gorenek; Antonio Pelliccia; Emelia J Benjamin; Giuseppe Boriani; Harry J Crijns; Richard I Fogel; Isabelle C Van Gelder; Martin Halle; Gulmira Kudaiberdieva; Deirdre A Lane; Torben Bjerregaard Larsen; Gregory Y H Lip; Maja-Lisa Løchen; Francisco Marín; Josef Niebauer; Prashanthan Sanders; Lale Tokgozoglu; Marc A Vos; David R Van Wagoner; Laurent Fauchier; Irina Savelieva; Andreas Goette; Stefan Agewall; Chern-En Chiang; Márcio Figueiredo; Martin Stiles; Timm Dickfeld; Kristen Patton; Massimo Piepoli; Ugo Corra; Pedro Manuel Marques-Vidal; Pompilio Faggiano; Jean-Paul Schmid; Ana Abreu
Journal:  Europace       Date:  2017-02-01       Impact factor: 5.214

2.  Pulmonary vein isolation with concomitant renal artery denervation is associated with reduction in both arterial blood pressure and atrial fibrillation burden: Data from implantable cardiac monitor.

Authors:  Alexander Romanov; Evgeny Pokushalov; Dmitry Ponomarev; Artem Strelnikov; Vitaliy Shabanov; Denis Losik; Alexander Karaskov; Jonathan S Steinberg
Journal:  Cardiovasc Ther       Date:  2017-08       Impact factor: 3.023

Review 3.  Role of the autonomic nervous system in atrial fibrillation: pathophysiology and therapy.

Authors:  Peng-Sheng Chen; Lan S Chen; Michael C Fishbein; Shien-Fong Lin; Stanley Nattel
Journal:  Circ Res       Date:  2014-04-25       Impact factor: 17.367

Review 4.  Hypertension and Atrial Fibrillation: An Intimate Association of Epidemiology, Pathophysiology, and Outcomes.

Authors:  Mikhail S Dzeshka; Farhan Shahid; Alena Shantsila; Gregory Y H Lip
Journal:  Am J Hypertens       Date:  2017-08-01       Impact factor: 2.689

5.  Pulmonary vein isolation combined with spironolactone or renal sympathetic denervation in patients with chronic kidney disease, uncontrolled hypertension, paroxysmal atrial fibrillation, and a pacemaker.

Authors:  Márcio Galindo Kiuchi; Shaojie Chen; Neil Alexander Hoye; Helmut Pürerfellner
Journal:  J Interv Card Electrophysiol       Date:  2017-12-20       Impact factor: 1.900

6.  Impact of Uncontrolled Hypertension on Atrial Fibrillation Ablation Outcome.

Authors:  Francesco Santoro; Luigi Di Biase; Chintan Trivedi; John David Burkhardt; Alessandro Paoletti Perini; Javier Sanchez; Rodney Horton; Prasant Mohanty; Sanghamitra Mohanty; Rong Bai; Pasquale Santangeli; Dhanunjay Lakkireddy; Madhu Reddy; Claude Samy Elayi; Richard Hongo; Salwa Beheiry; Steven Hao; Robert A Schweikert; Juan Viles-Gonzalez; Gaetano Fassini; Michela Casella; Antonio Dello Russo; Claudio Tondo; Andrea Natale
Journal:  JACC Clin Electrophysiol       Date:  2015-04-20

7.  Effect of Renal Denervation and Catheter Ablation vs Catheter Ablation Alone on Atrial Fibrillation Recurrence Among Patients With Paroxysmal Atrial Fibrillation and Hypertension: The ERADICATE-AF Randomized Clinical Trial.

Authors:  Jonathan S Steinberg; Vitaliy Shabanov; Dmitry Ponomarev; Denis Losik; Eduard Ivanickiy; Evgeny Kropotkin; Konstantin Polyakov; Pawel Ptaszynski; Boris Keweloh; Christopher J Yao; Evgeny A Pokushalov; Alexander B Romanov
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2020-01-21       Impact factor: 56.272

8.  Temporal trends in atrial fibrillation recurrence rates after ablation between 2005 and 2014: a nationwide Danish cohort study.

Authors:  Jannik Langtved Pallisgaard; Gunnar Hilmar Gislason; Jim Hansen; Arne Johannessen; Christian Torp-Pedersen; Peter Vibe Rasmussen; Morten Lock Hansen
Journal:  Eur Heart J       Date:  2018-02-07       Impact factor: 29.983

9.  Catheter-based renal denervation reduces atrial nerve sprouting and complexity of atrial fibrillation in goats.

Authors:  Dominik Linz; Arne van Hunnik; Mathias Hohl; Felix Mahfoud; Milan Wolf; Hans-Ruprecht Neuberger; Barbara Casadei; Svetlana N Reilly; Sander Verheule; Michael Böhm; Ulrich Schotten
Journal:  Circ Arrhythm Electrophysiol       Date:  2015-02-23

10.  Effects of electrical and structural remodeling on atrial fibrillation maintenance: a simulation study.

Authors:  Trine Krogh-Madsen; Geoffrey W Abbott; David J Christini
Journal:  PLoS Comput Biol       Date:  2012-02-23       Impact factor: 4.475

View more
  2 in total

1.  Systematic review of renal denervation for the management of cardiac arrhythmias.

Authors:  Nakulan Nantha Kumar; Kuda Nyatsuro; Shiraz Ahmad; Ibrahim T Fazmin; Khalil Saadeh; Gary Tse; Kamalan Jeevaratnam
Journal:  Clin Res Cardiol       Date:  2021-11-08       Impact factor: 6.138

Review 2.  Renal denervation for atrial fibrillation: a comprehensive updated systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Khaled Nawar; Ahmed Mohammad; Edward J Johns; Mohammed H Abdulla
Journal:  J Hum Hypertens       Date:  2022-01-29       Impact factor: 2.877

  2 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.