Willemien L. Verloop

Eligibility for percutaneous renal denervation: the importance of a systematic screening.

Objective: Percutaneous renal denervation (pRDN) is a new and promising therapy for resistant hypertension. Among patients suspected of having resistant hypertension, the actual presence of this condition needs to be well established; pseudoresistant hypertension and significant white-coat effect (WCE) should be excluded. This analysis presents the results of a standardized screening programme for patients referred for pRDN. Methods: All patients referred to our centre for pRDN underwent a standardized stepwise screening and were subsequently discussed in a multidisciplinary team. The screening included a 24-h ambulatory blood pressure measurement (ABPM), collection of plasma, urine and saliva, and finally imaging of the renal arteries. Results: From August 2010 till October 2012, 181 patients were referred for pRDN. Mean blood pressure (BP) was 182/100 mmHg, and median use was three antihypertensives. Ultimately, 121 patients (67%) were excluded from pRDN. Main reasons for exclusion were BP-related. Twenty-three patients (19%) had an office SBP less than 160 mmHg and 26 patients (22%) showed a WCE. Fourteen patients (12%) had a so far undetected underlying cause of hypertension, the majority being primary aldosteronism (n = 11). Nine patients had an ineligible renal anatomy. Conclusion: A high percentage of patients were excluded from treatment with pRDN due to secondary causes of hypertension, WCE or a BP below the currently advised thresholds. Treatment of these excluded patients would lead to inappropriate use of pRDN, leading most likely to little benefit for the patients and a burden to healthcare. Therefore, it is recommended to use a standardized screening before treatment with pRDN.

Renal denervation: a new treatment option in resistant arterial hypertension.

Hypertension is one of the most prevalent cardiovascular risk factors. Despite this high prevalence and a broad availability of effective pharmaceutical agents, a significant proportion of patients do not reach treatment goals. Partly this can be explained by secondary causes of hypertension or non-compliance of patients. Nevertheless, a subgroup of patients can be diagnosed with ‘resistant hypertension’. Activation of the sympathetic nervous system is known to be an important factor in the development and progression of systemic hypertension. In this context, a percutaneous, catheter–based approach has been developed using radiofrequency energy to disrupt renal sympathetic nerves. The first studies have shown this technique to be safe, illustrated by a lack of vascular or renal injury. More importantly, catheter-based renal nerve ablation resulted in a significant reduction in blood pressure on top of traditional medical therapy. Additional to the encouraging effects shown on hypertension, a positive influence of this intervention in other conditions, characterised by sympathetic overactivation, may be expected. Though this technique seems promising, further studies are needed to address long-term safety and efficacy of renal denervation in hypertension and other disease states.

Eligibility for Renal Denervation: Experience at 11 European Expert Centers

Based on the SYMPLICITY studies and CE (Conformité Européenne) certification, renal denervation is currently applied as a novel treatment of resistant hypertension in Europe. However, information on the proportion of patients with resistant hypertension qualifying for renal denervation after a thorough work-up and treatment adjustment remains scarce. The aim of this study was to investigate the proportion of patients eligible for renal denervation and the reasons for noneligibility at 11 expert centers participating in the European Network COordinating Research on renal Denervation in treatment-resistant hypertension (ENCOReD). The analysis included 731 patients. Age averaged 61.6 years, office blood pressure at screening was 177/96 mm Hg, and the number of blood pressure–lowering drugs taken was 4.1. Specialists referred 75.6% of patients. The proportion of patients eligible for renal denervation according to the SYMPLICITY HTN-2 criteria and each center’s criteria was 42.5% (95% confidence interval, 38.0%–47.0%) and 39.7% (36.2%–43.2%), respectively. The main reasons of noneligibility were normalization of blood pressure after treatment adjustment (46.9%), unsuitable renal arterial anatomy (17.0%), and previously undetected secondary causes of hypertension (11.1%). In conclusion, after careful screening and treatment adjustment at hypertension expert centers, only ≈40% of patients referred for renal denervation, mostly by specialists, were eligible for the procedure. The most frequent cause of ineligibility (approximately half of cases) was blood pressure normalization after treatment adjustment by a hypertension specialist. Our findings highlight that hypertension centers with a record in clinical experience and research should remain the gatekeepers before renal denervation is considered.Based on the SYMPLICITY studies and CE (Conformite Europeenne) certification, renal denervation is currently applied as a novel treatment of resistant hypertension in Europe. However, information on the proportion of patients with resistant hypertension qualifying for renal denervation after a thorough work-up and treatment adjustment remains scarce. The aim of this study was to investigate the proportion of patients eligible for renal denervation and the reasons for noneligibility at 11 expert centers participating in the European Network COordinating Research on renal Denervation in treatment-resistant hypertension (ENCOReD). The analysis included 731 patients. Age averaged 61.6 years, office blood pressure at screening was 177/96 mm Hg, and the number of blood pressure–lowering drugs taken was 4.1. Specialists referred 75.6% of patients. The proportion of patients eligible for renal denervation according to the SYMPLICITY HTN-2 criteria and each center’s criteria was 42.5% (95% confidence interval, 38.0%–47.0%) and 39.7% (36.2%–43.2%), respectively. The main reasons of noneligibility were normalization of blood pressure after treatment adjustment (46.9%), unsuitable renal arterial anatomy (17.0%), and previously undetected secondary causes of hypertension (11.1%). In conclusion, after careful screening and treatment adjustment at hypertension expert centers, only ≈40% of patients referred for renal denervation, mostly by specialists, were eligible for the procedure. The most frequent cause of ineligibility (approximately half of cases) was blood pressure normalization after treatment adjustment by a hypertension specialist. Our findings highlight that hypertension centers with a record in clinical experience and research should remain the gatekeepers before renal denervation is considered. # Novelty and Significance {#article-title-32}

Renal denervation in heart failure with normal left ventricular ejection fraction. Rationale and design of the DIASTOLE (DenervatIon of the renAl Sympathetic nerves in hearT failure with nOrmal Lv Ejection fraction) trial

Increasing evidence suggests an important role for hyperactivation of the sympathetic nervous system (SNS) in the clinical phenomena of heart failure with normal LVEF (HFNEF) and hypertension. Moreover, the level of renal sympathetic activation is directly related to the severity of heart failure. Since percutaneous renal denervation (pRDN) has been shown to be effective in modulating elevated SNS activity in patients with hypertension, it can be hypothesized that pRDN has a positive effect on HFNEF. The DIASTOLE trial will investigate whether renal sympathetic denervation influences parameters of HFNEF.

Denervation of the Renal Arteries in Metabolic Syndrome The DREAMS-Study

Chronic elevation of sympathetic nervous system is a key factor in metabolic syndrome. Because renal denervation (RDN) is thought to modulate sympathetic activity, we performed the Denervation of the Renal Arteries in Metabolic Syndrome (DREAMS)–study to investigate the effects of RDN on insulin sensitivity and blood pressure (BP) in patients with metabolic syndrome. Twenty-nine patients fulfilling the criteria for metabolic syndrome and who used a maximum of 1 antihypertensive or 1 antidiabetic drug or 1 of both gave informed consent and were treated by RDN. Glucose tolerance tests and 24-hour ambulatory BP measurements were performed at baseline, at 6 and 12 months of follow-up. Moreover, we performed self-monitored BP measurements at home every month. To assess sympathetic activity, we performed muscle sympathetic nerve activity and heart rate variability measurements at baseline and follow-up. The majority of the included patients was men (57%), mean body mass index was 31±5 kg/m2. Median insulin sensitivity as assessed by the Simple Index assessing Insulin Sensitivity oral glucose tolerance test did not change at 6- and 12-month follow-up (P=0.60 and P=0.77, respectively). Mean 24-hour BP decreased by 6±12/5±7 mm Hg 12 months after RDN (P=0.04/0.01). However, self-monitored BP measurements data showed no reduction over time. Measurements of sympathetic activity showed no reduction in systemic sympathetic activity. In conclusion, RDN did not lead to a significant improvement of insulin sensitivity ⩽12 months after treatment. Although a significant reduction in ambulatory BP was observed in this nearly drug-naïve population, the self-monitored BP measurements data suggest that this may be explained by regression to the mean. Moreover, no effect in systemic sympathetic activity was observed.

Effects of renal denervation on end organ damage in hypertensive patients

Background Renal denervation (RDN) is believed to reduce sympathetic nerve activity and is a potential treatment for resistant hypertension. The present study investigated the effects of RDN on end organ damage (EOD). Design The present study was a prospective cohort study (registered as NCT01427049). Methods Uncontrolled hypertensive patients underwent a work-up prior to and one year after RDN. Cardiac magnetic resonance (CMR) imaging was used to determine left ventricular (LV)-mass; pulse wave analysis and pulse wave velocity (PWV) were used for evaluation of central blood pressure (BP) and arterial stiffness and 24-hour urine was collected for assessment of urinary albumin excretion. The 24-hour ambulatory BP measurement (ABPM) was used to evaluate the effect of RDN on BP. Results Fifty-four patients gave informed consent for study participation. Mean age was 58 ± 10 years, 50% were male. One year after RDN, mean ABPM decreased by 7 ± 18/5 ± 11 mm Hg (p = 0.01/p < 0.01). In the patients followed-up in a standardised fashion ABPM decreased by 5 ± 18/4 ± 12 mm Hg (n = 34; p = 0.11/p = 0.09). Mean body surface area indexed LV-mass decreased by 3.3 ± 11.5 g/m2 (corresponding to a 3 ± 11% reduction; p = 0.09). PWV increased by 2.9 (−2.2 to +6.1) m/s (p = 0.04). Augmentation index corrected for 75 beats per min did not change (median increase 3.0 (−7 to +17) mm Hg; p = 0.89). Urinary albumin excretion did not change during follow-up (mean decrease 10 ± 117 mg/24 hour; p = 0.61). Conclusion In the current study, we observed a modest effect from renal denervation. Moreover, RDN did not result in a statistical significant effect on end organ damage 12 months after treatment.

A systematic review concerning the relation between the sympathetic nervous system and heart failure with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction.

Background Heart failure with preserved left ventricular ejection fraction (HFPEF) affects about half of all patients diagnosed with heart failure. The pathophysiological aspect of this complex disease state has been extensively explored, yet it is still not fully understood. Since the sympathetic nervous system is related to the development of systolic HF, we hypothesized that an increased sympathetic nerve activation (SNA) is also related to the development of HFPEF. This review summarizes the available literature regarding the relation between HFPEF and SNA. Methods and Results Electronic databases and reference lists through April 2014 were searched resulting in 7722 unique articles. Three authors independently evaluated citation titles and abstracts, resulting in 77 articles reporting about the role of the sympathetic nervous system and HFPEF. Of these 77 articles, 15 were included for critical appraisal: 6 animal and 9 human studies. Based on the critical appraisal, we selected 9 articles (3 animal, 6 human) for further analysis. In all the animal studies, isoproterenol was administered to mimic an increased sympathetic activity. In human studies, different modalities for assessment of sympathetic activity were used. The studies selected for further evaluation reported a clear relation between HFPEF and SNA. Conclusion Current literature confirms a relation between increased SNA and HFPEF. However, current literature is not able to distinguish whether enhanced SNA results in HFPEF, or HFPEF results in enhanced SNA. The most likely setting is a vicious circle in which HFPEF and SNA sustain each other.

The blood pressure-lowering effect of renal denervation is inversely related to kidney function.

Objectives: In renal denervation (RDN), a wide range in the blood pressure (BP)-lowering effect has been reported. On the basis of the current knowledge of pathophysiology, we hypothesized that the BP-lowering effect of RDN would be inversely related to kidney function. Second, we investigated whether direct and indirect variables of the renin–angiotensin–aldosterone system (RAAS) and the sympathetic nervous system (SNS) would be related as well. Methods: Sixty-seven patients from a prospective cohort of patients treated with RDN with completed 6 months follow-up were included. Data collected during routine standardized work-up before RDN were used: 24-h urine excretion of creatinine, albumin, sodium and catecholamines, plasma creatinine, renin activity and aldosterone, ambulatory BP-monitoring and a captopril challenge test. When considered well tolerated, antihypertensive drugs were stopped before these investigations. Results: The BP-lowering was inversely related to estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) in patients who stopped antihypertensive drugs prior to testing (ß: 0.46, P = 0.013). There was a positive relation between SBP at baseline and the BP-lowering effect of RDN (ß:–0.55 mmHg per mmHg, P < 0.001). Parameters related to the rennin–angiotensin system (aldosterone, captopril test) and the sympathetic nervous system (dipping pattern and catecholamines in urine) positively related to the BP-lowering effect of RDN. Conclusion: The present explorative study shows an inverse relation between the BP-lowering effect of RDN and eGFR. Second, we found relations between variables of the RAAS and SNS with the BP-lowering effect of RDN. The data complement current concepts on pathophysiology of sympathetic hyperactivity and hypertension and may give some insight in the wide range of the effect of RDN.

Renal denervation in multiple renal arteries

In most previous studies investigating efficacy of renal denervation (RDN), patients with multiple renal arteries are generally excluded from treatment. This study was designed to determine the prevalence of multiple renal arteries in patients referred for RDN, to propose a classification for anatomical eligibility and to investigate the relation between the presence of multiple arteries and blood pressure (BP)‐lowering effect.

The Effects of Renal Denervation on Renal Hemodynamics and Renal Vasculature in a Porcine Model.

Rationale Recently, the efficacy of renal denervation (RDN) has been debated. It is discussed whether RDN is able to adequately target the renal nerves. Objective We aimed to investigate how effective RDN was by means of functional hemodynamic measurements and nerve damage on histology. Methods and Results We performed hemodynamic measurements in both renal arteries of healthy pigs using a Doppler flow and pressure wire. Subsequently unilateral denervation was performed, followed by repeated bilateral hemodynamic measurements. Pigs were terminated directly after RDN or were followed for 3 weeks or 3 months after the procedure. After termination, both treated and control arteries were prepared for histology to evaluate vascular damage and nerve damage. Directly after RDN, resting renal blood flow tended to increase by 29±67% (P = 0.01). In contrast, renal resistance reserve increased from 1.74 (1.28) to 1.88 (1.17) (P = 0.02) during follow-up. Vascular histopathology showed that most nerves around the treated arteries were located outside the lesion areas (8±7 out of 55±25 (14%) nerves per pig were observed within a lesion area). Subsequently, a correlation was noted between a more impaired adventitia and a reduction in renal resistance reserve (β: -0.33; P = 0.05) at three weeks of follow-up. Conclusion Only a small minority of renal nerves was targeted after RDN. Furthermore, more severe adventitial damage was related to a reduction in renal resistance in the treated arteries at follow-up. These hemodynamic and histological observations may indicate that RDN did not sufficiently target the renal nerves. Potentially, this may explain the significant spread in the response after RDN.