The position of renal denervation in treatment of hypertension: an expert consensus statement
Rattachement africain : nl. Niveau de preuve : code pays fourni par la source.
Le résumé fourni par la source
Hypertension is an important risk factor for cardiovascular disease. In the Netherlands, there are approximately 2.8 million people with hypertension. Despite treatment recommendations including lifestyle changes and antihypertensive drugs, most patients do not meet guideline-recommended blood pressure (BP) targets. In order to improve BP control and lower the risk of subsequent cardiovascular events, renal sympathetic denervation (RDN) has been introduced and studied as a non-pharmacological approach. While early data on the efficacy of RDN showed conflicting results, improvements in treatment protocols and study design resulted in robust new evidence supporting the potential of the technology to improve patient care in hypertensive subjects. Recently, 5 randomised sham-controlled trials demonstrated the safety and efficacy of the technology. Modelling studies have further shown that RDN is cost-effective in the Dutch healthcare setting. Given the undisputable disease burden along with the shortcomings of current therapeutic options, we postulate a new, clearly framed indication for RDN as an adjunct in the treatment of hypertension. The present consensus statement summarises current guideline-recommended BP targets, proposed workup and treatment for hypertension, and position of RDN for those patients with primary hypertension who do not meet guideline-recommended BP targets (see central illustration).
Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.
Le contrôle bibliographique ouvert
DOI retrouvé dans Crossref DOI retrouvé ; titre concordant.
- Titre Crossref
- The position of renal denervation in treatment of hypertension: an expert consensus statement
- Date Crossref
- 24/08/2022
- Éditeur
- Springer Science and Business Media LLC
- Type
- journal-article
Ce recoupement confirme des métadonnées liées au DOI. Il ne confirme ni la méthode ni les conclusions de l’étude, et il ne compte pas comme une seconde source scientifique indépendante.
Les institutions déclarées
Une affiliation ne permet pas de déduire la nationalité d’un auteur.