Cited by 55Blood Pressure and Hypertension StudiesRenal and Vascular PathologiesHormonal Regulation and Hypertension

Renal denervation for treatment of drug-resistant hypertension

Esler, Murray·2015·Trends in Cardiovascular Medicine

Abstract

At the seven-year anniversary of the first catheter-based renal denervation procedure for resistant hypertension, it is timely to reflect on the past, present, and future of the development and clinical application of this treatment. Unresolved procedural and technical questions are central: How much renal denervation is optimal? How can this level of denervation be achieved? What test for denervation can be applied in renal denervation trials? Will renal denervation show a "class effect," with the different energy forms now used for renal nerve ablation producing equivalent blood pressure lowering? When I have assessed renal denervation efficacy, using measurements of the spillover of norepinephrine from the renal sympathetic nerves to plasma, the only test validated to this point, denervation was found to be incomplete and non-uniform between patients. It is probable that the degree of denervation has commonly been suboptimal in renal denervation trials; this criticism applying with special force to the Symplicity HTN-3 trial, where the proceduralists, although expert interventional cardiologists, had no prior experience with the renal denervation technique. Recently presented results from the Symplicity HTN-3 trial confirm that renal denervation was not achieved effectively or consistently. Given this, and other difficulties in the execution of the trial relating to drug adherence, an idea mooted is that the US pivotal trial of the future may be in younger, untreated patients.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.tcm.2014.09.014

Cites

52 of 52 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Esler, M.
Affiliations
Baker Heart and Diabetes Institute (AU)
Corresponding author
Esler, Murray
Venue
Trends in Cardiovascular Medicine
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2015-02
Volume
25
Issue
2
Pages
107-115
ISSN
1050-1738 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2080826845
Cited by
55
References
52
Citations by year
2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 14 · 2016: 10 · 2015: 8 · 2014: 5
FWCI
1.99
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Trends in Cardiovascular Medicine (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
National Health and Medical Research Council
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Cardiology and Cardiovascular Medicine › Blood Pressure and Hypertension Studies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pulmonary and Respiratory Medicine › Renal and Vascular Pathologies
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Endocrinology, Diabetes and Metabolism › Hormonal Regulation and Hypertension
Keywords
renal denervation, resistant hypertension, renal sympathetic nerves, norepinephrine spillover, Symplicity HTN-3 trial, catheter ablation, energy forms, blood pressure reduction, medication adherence, trial design
MeSH terms
Drug Resistance, Humans, Hypertension, Renal, Kidney, Sympathectomy

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review