Abstract 18210: Renal Denervation in Management of Heart Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Résumé fourni par la source

Introduction: Renal denervation (RDN) is a novel intervention targeting sympathetic nerves along the renal artery. Ablation of this neurohormonal pathway alters the pathophysiology of heart failure (HF) and can lead to improvements in clinical outcomes. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to review the outcome of heart failure patients undergoing RDN. Methods: We performed a comprehensive search on PubMed, Cochrane, and Embase from inceptions through June 2023 using the string “(“renal denervation” OR “renal sympathetic denervation “) AND (“heart failure” OR “congestive heart failure”)”. Exclusion criteria include non-human trials, studies without a baseline and control, and studies without outcomes of interest. We collected the number of patients with HF and the resulting outcomes. Outcomes of interest include left ventricular ejection fraction (LVEF), six minute walk distance (SMWD), NT- proBNP, and systolic and diastolic pressures. The random-effects model was used to calculate the odds ratios (OR), mean differences (MD), and confidence intervals (CI). A p value <0.05 was considered statistically significant. Heterogeneity was assessed using the Higgins I2 index. Results: Nine randomized control trials involving a total of 513 patients were included in our analysis. We found a significant difference when comparing the RDN group to the control groups for LVEF (MD 1.39, 95% CI [0.03,2.75]), SMWD (MD 200.13 m, 95% CI [187.32,212.95]), NT-proBNP (MD -397.16 pg/ml, 95% CI [-438.90, -355.42]), SBP (MD -3.69 mmHg, 95% CI [-7.24, -0.14]) within 12 months. Interestingly, difference in DBP was insignificant (MD -1.13 mmHg, 95% CI [-3.33,1.07]). Our RDN group had a significant decrease in hospital admissions (OR 0.83, 95% CI [0.25,2.77]) for HF exacerbation within 12 month following denervation. When comparing RND to baseline, we found a significant difference in LVEF (MD 1.90, 95% CI [0.64,3.16]) and SMWD (MD 106.56 m, 95% CI [88.72,124.40]). Conclusions: Our analysis demonstrates RDN results in a significant difference in LVEF, SMWD, NT-proBNP, and SBP in patients with HF when compared to control and baseline. However, further research is needed with larger samples to establish the safety and effectiveness of RDN as a viable therapy in HF.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.