Literature DB >> 33356403

Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring to Predict Response to Renal Denervation: A Post Hoc Analysis of the RADIANCE-HTN SOLO Study.

Philippe Gosse1, Antoine Cremer1, Ajay J Kirtane2, Melvin D Lobo3, Manish Saxena3, Joost Daemen4, Yale Wang5, Johannes Stegbauer6, Michael A Weber7, Josephine Abraham8, Kazuomi Kario9, Sripal Bangalore10, Lisa Claude11, Yuyin Liu12, Michel Azizi13,14,15.   

Abstract

Renal denervation (RDN) is effective in lowering blood pressure (BP) in patients with hypertension. The issue remains how to best identify potential responders. Ambulatory BP monitoring may be useful. Baseline nighttime systolic BP (SBP) ≥136 mm Hg and its variability (SD) ≥12 mm Hg in DENER-HTN trial or 24-hour heart rate ≥73.5 bpm in SPYRAL HTN-OFF MED Trial were shown to predict the BP response to RDN. We applied these criteria to the patients with hypertension in the sham-controlled RADIANCE-HTN SOLO trial to predict the BP response to ultrasound RDN at 2 months while patients were maintained off medications. BP responders were defined as: clinical with 24-hour SBP <130 mm Hg (RDN: 22/64 versus sham: 7/58); meaningful with 24-hour SBP reduction ≥10 mm Hg (RDN: 24/64, sham: 7/58); and extreme with 24-hour SBP reduction above mean+2 SD of the SBP decrease in the sham group, that is, ≥16.5 mm Hg (RDN: 10/64 versus sham: 2/58). The predictive criteria reported above were tested for sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values. The predictive value varied according to the definition of response, with the clinical definition being strongly influenced by regression to the mean. Baseline nighttime SBP and its variability, especially when combined, offered good specificity (>90% irrespective of definition) but low sensitivity (from 9.1% to 30% depending on the definition) to predict responders; the heart rate criterion had insufficient predictive value. This analysis suggests the potential role of nighttime SBP and its variability to predict BP response to RDN in patients with hypertension. Registration: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02649426.

Entities:  

Keywords:  ambulatory blood pressure monitoring; blood pressure variability; heart rate; hypertension; renal denervation

Year:  2020        PMID: 33356403     DOI: 10.1161/HYPERTENSIONAHA.120.16292

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Hypertension        ISSN: 0194-911X            Impact factor:   10.190


  5 in total

Review 1.  The position of renal denervation in treatment of hypertension: an expert consensus statement.

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

2.  Twenty-Four-Hour Pulsatile Hemodynamics Predict Brachial Blood Pressure Response to Renal Denervation in the SPYRAL HTN-OFF MED Trial.

Authors:  Thomas Weber; Siegfried Wassertheurer; Christopher C Mayer; Bernhard Hametner; Kathrin Danninger; Raymond R Townsend; Felix Mahfoud; Kazuomi Kario; Martin Fahy; Vanessa DeBruin; Nicole Peterson; Manuela Negoita; Michael A Weber; David E Kandzari; Roland E Schmieder; Konstantinos P Tsioufis; Ronald K Binder; Michael Böhm
Journal:  Hypertension       Date:  2022-05-18       Impact factor: 9.897

Review 3.  Patient Selection for Renal Denervation in Hypertensive Patients: What Makes a Good Candidate?

Authors:  Sheran Li; Jacqueline K Phillips
Journal:  Vasc Health Risk Manag       Date:  2022-05-13

Review 4.  Present Evidence of Determinants to Predict the Efficacy of Renal Denervation.

Authors:  Hao Zhou; Yanping Xu; Weijie Chen; Liang Wang; Huaan Du; Hang Liu; Zhiyu Ling; Yuehui Yin
Journal:  Int J Hypertens       Date:  2022-08-12       Impact factor: 2.434

Review 5.  Arterial hypertension - Clinical trials update 2021.

Authors:  Hussam Al Ghorani; Felix Götzinger; Michael Böhm; Felix Mahfoud
Journal:  Nutr Metab Cardiovasc Dis       Date:  2021-09-16       Impact factor: 4.222

  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.