Background: Renal denervation (RDN) is a promising treatment option in addition to medical antihypertensive treatment in patients suffering from resistant hypertension. Despite the growing interest in RDN, the negative result of the Symplicity HTN-3 trial led to a debate on the efficacy of RDN.
Methods: We systematically investigated the effects of RDN, evaluated by 24-hr ambulatory blood pressure measurements (ABPM), in a consecutive series of patients with resistant hypertension, which was defined by a mean office systolic blood pressure (SBP) >160 mm Hg (>150 mm Hg in patients with diabetes). Patients with a mean 24-hr SBP of less than 130 mm Hg at baseline were classified as pseudo-resistant, while all other patients were classified as true-resistant. After six months, we analyzed the response rates in true-resistant and in pseudo-resistant patients, respectively, by the means of 24-hr ABPM. Thereby, patients with a reduction of more than 5 mm Hg in 24-hr SBP were classified as responders.
Results: RDN was performed in 106 patients. By 24-hr ABPM, 20 patients (18.9%) were classified as pseudo-resistant patients. In this cohort, we only found two responders (response rate 10%) six months after RDN. By contrast, in true-resistant patients, the response rate was almost 60% and the mean BP reduction was -18.6/-9 mm Hg in 24-hr ABPM.
Conclusions: We found a significant BP reduction in almost 60% of patients with true-resistant hypertension, but only in 10% in patients with pseudo-resistant hypertension. According to our results, patient selection seems to be crucial for acceptable response rates after RDN.
Keywords: endovascular intervention; hypertension; sympathetic denervation.
© 2015 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.