Efficacy and Safety of Catheter-Based Renal Denervation for Patients With Hypertension: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

经导管肾动脉去神经术治疗高血压患者的疗效和安全性:系统评价和荟萃分析

阅读:1

Abstract

This meta-analysis evaluates the efficacy and safety of renal denervation (RDN) for patients with hypertension. PubMed, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and ClinicalTrials.gov were systematically searched to identify relevant studies published before December 31, 2024. Review Manager 5.3 software was used to assess the results of the meta-analyses and the risk of bias plot. We pooled 2208 participants from 13 studies. The RDN was superior to the sham surgery group in the change in 24 h ambulatory systolic blood pressure (ASBP) and the change in 24 h ambulatory diastolic blood pressure (ADBP) (MD: -4.55 mmHg, 95% CI: -5.65 to -3.44; MD: -2.37 mmHg, 95% CI: -3.06 to -1.68, respectively). For the change in daytime ASBP and ADBP, significant differences were found between the RDN group and the sham group (MD: -6.21 mmHg, 95% CI: -7.61 to -4.80; MD: -2.96, 95% CI: -3.85 to -2.07). Compared to the sham surgery group, the RDN group showed better results in the change in night-time ASBP and ADBP (MD: -4.67 mmHg, 95% CI: -6.32 to -3.03; MD: -2.28 mmHg, 95% CI: -3.33 to -1.24). No significant differences were found between the RDN group and the sham group in terms of adverse events (AEs) and serious adverse events (SAEs) (p = 0.39 and 0.07). Subgroup analyses showed that RDN remains effective at long-term follow-up, and both ultrasound and radiofrequency RDN were effective. Current evidence shows that RDN is an effective treatment for patients with hypertension and does not increase the risk of AEs and SAEs.

特别声明

1、本页面内容包含部分的内容是基于公开信息的合理引用;引用内容仅为补充信息,不代表本站立场。

2、若认为本页面引用内容涉及侵权,请及时与本站联系,我们将第一时间处理。

3、其他媒体/个人如需使用本页面原创内容,需注明“来源:[生知库]”并获得授权;使用引用内容的,需自行联系原作者获得许可。

4、投稿及合作请联系:info@biocloudy.com。