Renal Denervation Effects on Blood Pressure in Resistant and Uncontrolled Hypertension: A Meta-Analysis of Sham-Controlled Randomized Clinical Trials

Background

Although some guidelines recommend Renal denervation (RDN) as an alternative to anti-HTN medications, there are concerns about its efficacy and safety. We aimed to evaluate the benefits and harms of RDN in a systematic review and meta-analysis of sham-controlled randomized clinical trials (RCT).

Methods

Databases were searched until September 10th, 2024, to identify RCTs evaluating RDN for treating URH versus sham control. The primary outcomes were the change in office and ambulatory 24-h systolic (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP). Secondary outcomes were changes in daytime and nighttime SBP and DBP, home BP, number of anti-HTN drugs, and related complications. Mean differences (MD) and relative risks (RR) described the effects of RDN on BP and complications, respectively, using random effects meta-analyses. GRADE methodology was used to assess the certainty of evidence (COE).

Results

We found 16 included sham-controlled RCTs [RDN (n = 1594) vs. sham (n = 1225)]. RDN significantly reduced office SBP (MD −4.26 mmHg, 95% CI: −5.68 to −2.84), 24 h ambulatory SBP (MD −2.63 mmHg), office DBP (MD −2.15 mmHg), 24-h ambulatory DBP (MD −1.27 mmHg), and daytime SBP and DBP (MD −3.29 and 2.97 mmHg), compared to the sham. The rate of severe complications was low in both groups (0%–2%). The heterogeneity was high among most indices, and CoE was very low for most outcomes.

Conclusion

RDN significantly reduced several SBP and DBP outcomes versus sham without significantly increasing complications. This makes RDN a potentially effective alternative to medications in URH.