4.6 Article

The effect of percutaneous renal denervation on muscle sympathetic nerve activity in hypertensive patients

期刊

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF CARDIOLOGY
卷 176, 期 1, 页码 8-12

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijcard.2014.06.021

关键词

Resistant hypertension; Renal denervation; Blood pressure; Sympathetic activity; Muscle sympathetic nerve activity

资金

  1. Dutch Kidney Foundation [IP10-15]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Objective: The rationale of percutaneous renal denervation (RDN) is based on extensive studies suggesting that renal nerves contribute to hypertension and that they comprise a sensible treatment target. Muscle sympathetic nerve activity (MSNA) is considered to be one of the few reliable methods to quantify central sympathetic activity. The aim of this current study is to determine the effect of RDN on MSNA in a standardized fashion. Methods: MSNA was determined in 13 patients before and 6 months after RDN. Anti-hypertensive medication was stopped before MSNA. If cessation of medication was considered unsafe, a patient was instructed to use the exact same medication on both occasions. Results: Ten sets of MSNA recordings were of good quality for analysis. Mean age was 57 +/- 3 years and mean eGFR was 85 +/- 18 mL/min/1.73 m(2). MSNA was determined twice during a medication free interval in 5 patients; 1 patient used the exact same medication twice, and 4 patients used different drugs. Mean BP changed from 206 +/- 7 over 116 +/- 4 mm Hg, to 186 +/- 6 over 106 +/- 3 mm Hg, 6 months after RDN (p = 0.06 for systolic BP, p = 0.04 for diastolic BP). Mean resting heart rate did not change (p = 0.44). MSNA did not change after RDN: 37 +/- 4 bursts/min and 43 +/- 4 bursts/min (p - 0.11) at baseline and after RDN, respectively. In the 6 patients with standardized medication use during the MSNA sessions, results were comparable. Conclusions: Treatment with RDN did not result in a change in MSNA. Changes in BP did not correlate with changes in MSNA. (C) 2014 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据