Gender Difference of Blood Pressure Control Rate and Clinical Prognosis in Patients With Resistant Hypertension: Real-World Observation Study.

BACKGROUND: There are several differences in the clinical course of hypertension due to the biological and social differences between men and women. Resistant hypertension is an advanced disease state, and significant gender difference could be expected, but much has not been revealed yet. The purpose of this study was to compare gender differences on the current status of blood pressure (BP) control and clinical prognosis in patients with resistant hypertension. METHODS: This is a multicenter, retrospective cohort study using common data model databases of 3 tertiary hospitals in Korea. Total 4,926 patients with resistant hypertension were selected from January 2017 to December 2018. Occurrence of dialysis, heart failure (HF) hospitalization, myocardial infarction, stroke, dementia or all-cause mortality was followed up for 3 years. RESULTS: Male patients with resistant hypertension were younger but had a higher cardiovascular risk than female patients. Prevalence of left ventricular hypertrophy and proteinuria was higher in men than in women. On-treatment diastolic BP was lower in women than in men and target BP achievement rate was higher in women than in men. During 3 years, the incidence of dialysis and myocardial infarction was higher in men, and the incidence of stroke and dementia was higher in women. After adjustment, male sex was an independent risk factor for HF hospitalization, myocardial infarction, and all-cause death. CONCLUSION: In resistant hypertension, men were younger than women, but end-organ damage was more common and the risk of cardiovascular event was higher. More intensive cardiovascular prevention strategies may be required in male patients with resistant hypertension.

Renal denervation for the treatment of cardiovascular high risk-hypertension or beyond?

Hypertension imposes a major burden of morbidity and mortality and is associated with sympathetic nervous system overactivity. Renal sympathetic denervation has been shown to reduce office blood pressure, ambulatory blood pressure, and sympathetic activity in patients with resistant hypertension. Therefore, the procedure has attracted a lot of attention. Beyond blood pressure, renal denervation has been shown to improve glucose tolerance, microalbuminuria, and arrhythmias in several experimental models and, in admittedly, often uncontrolled clinical studies. It has been demonstrated to reduce myocardial hypertrophy in a blood pressure-independent and blood pressure-dependent way. The first studies on heart failure with preserved and reduced ejection fraction are ongoing. Renal sympathetic denervation holds promise for future indications in hypertension and related comorbidities and consequences, such as metabolic disease, renal failure, and heart failure. Published data in a placebo-control blinded study, however, are needed. The aim of this review is to provide a critical and comprehensive overview of heretofore generated data on renal denervation in experimental models, in human hypertension, and on early developments in new indications, which should indicate the way to powered and performed, controlled clinical studies appropriately.

Ambulatory blood pressure changes after renal sympathetic denervation in patients with resistant hypertension.

BACKGROUND: Catheter-based renal sympathetic denervation (RDN) reduces office blood pressure (BP) in patients with resistant hypertension according to office BP. Less is known about the effect of RDN on 24-hour BP measured by ambulatory BP monitoring and correlates of response in individuals with true or pseudoresistant hypertension. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 346 uncontrolled hypertensive patients, separated according to daytime ambulatory BP monitoring into 303 with true resistant (office systolic BP [SBP] 172.2±22 mm Hg; 24-hour SBP 154±16.2 mm Hg) and 43 with pseudoresistant hypertension (office SBP 161.2±20.3 mm Hg; 24-hour SBP 121.1±19.6 mm Hg), from 10 centers were studied. At 3, 6, and 12 months follow-up, office SBP was reduced by 21.5/23.7/27.3 mm Hg, office diastolic BP by 8.9/9.5/11.7 mm Hg, and pulse pressure by 13.4/14.2/14.9 mm Hg (n=245/236/90; P for all <0.001), respectively. In patients with true treatment resistance there was a significant reduction with RDN in 24-hour SBP (-10.1/-10.2/-11.7 mm Hg, P<0.001), diastolic BP (-4.8/-4.9/-7.4 mm Hg, P<0.001), maximum SBP (-11.7/-10.0/-6.1 mm Hg, P<0.001) and minimum SBP (-6.0/-9.4/-13.1 mm Hg, P<0.001) at 3, 6, and 12 months, respectively. There was no effect on ambulatory BP monitoring in pseudoresistant patients, whereas office BP was reduced to a similar extent. RDN was equally effective in reducing BP in different subgroups of patients. Office SBP at baseline was the only independent correlate of BP response. CONCLUSIONS: RDN reduced office BP and improved relevant aspects of ambulatory BP monitoring, commonly linked to high cardiovascular risk, in patients with true-treatment resistant hypertension, whereas it only affected office BP in pseudoresistant hypertension.

Resistant Hypertension: Detection, Evaluation, and Management: A Scientific Statement From the American Heart Association.

Resistant hypertension (RH) is defined as above-goal elevated blood pressure (BP) in a patient despite the concurrent use of 3 antihypertensive drug classes, commonly including a long-acting calcium channel blocker, a blocker of the renin-angiotensin system (angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor or angiotensin receptor blocker), and a diuretic. The antihypertensive drugs should be administered at maximum or maximally tolerated daily doses. RH also includes patients whose BP achieves target values on ≥4 antihypertensive medications. The diagnosis of RH requires assurance of antihypertensive medication adherence and exclusion of the "white-coat effect" (office BP above goal but out-of-office BP at or below target). The importance of RH is underscored by the associated risk of adverse outcomes compared with non-RH. This article is an updated American Heart Association scientific statement on the detection, evaluation, and management of RH. Once antihypertensive medication adherence is confirmed and out-of-office BP recordings exclude a white-coat effect, evaluation includes identification of contributing lifestyle issues, detection of drugs interfering with antihypertensive medication effectiveness, screening for secondary hypertension, and assessment of target organ damage. Management of RH includes maximization of lifestyle interventions, use of long-acting thiazide-like diuretics (chlorthalidone or indapamide), addition of a mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (spironolactone or eplerenone), and, if BP remains elevated, stepwise addition of antihypertensive drugs with complementary mechanisms of action to lower BP. If BP remains uncontrolled, referral to a hypertension specialist is advised.

The concept of crosstalk-directed embryological target mining and its application to essential hypertension treatment failures.

This review aims to introduce the novel concept of embryological target mining applied to interorgan crosstalk network genesis, and applies embryological target mining to multidrug-resistant essential hypertension (a prototype, complex, undertreated, multiorgan systemic syndrome) to uncover new treatment targets and critique why existing strategies fail. Briefly, interorgan crosstalk pathways represent the next frontier for target mining in molecular medicine. This is because stereotyped stepwise organogenesis presents a unique opportunity to infer interorgan crosstalk pathways that may be crucial to discovering novel treatment targets. Insights gained from this review will be applied to patient management in a clinician-directed fashion.

Persistent Increase in Blood Pressure After Renal Nerve Stimulation in Accessory Renal Arteries After Sympathetic Renal Denervation.

Blood pressure response to renal denervation is highly variable, and the proportion of responders is disappointing. This may be partly because of accessory renal arteries too small for denervation, causing incomplete ablation. Renal nerve stimulation before and after renal denervation is a promising approach to assess completeness of renal denervation and may predict blood pressure response to renal denervation. The objective of the current study was to assess renal nerve stimulation-induced blood pressure increase before and after renal sympathetic denervation in main and accessory renal arteries of anaesthetized patients with drug-resistant hypertension. The study included 21 patients. Nine patients had at least 1 accessory renal artery in which renal denervation was not feasible. Renal nerve stimulation was performed in the main arteries of all patients and in accessory renal arteries of 6 of 9 patients with accessory arteries, both before and after renal sympathetic denervation. Renal nerve stimulation before renal denervation elicited a substantial increase in systolic blood pressure, both in main (25.6±2.9 mm Hg; P<0.001) and accessory (24.3±7.4 mm Hg; P=0.047) renal arteries. After renal denervation, renal nerve stimulation-induced systolic blood pressure increase was blunted in the main renal arteries (Δ systolic blood pressure, 8.6±3.7 mm Hg; P=0.020), but not in the nondenervated renal accessory renal arteries (Δ systolic blood pressure, 27.1±7.6 mm Hg; P=0.917). This residual source of renal sympathetic tone may result in persistent hypertension after ablation and partly account for the large response variability.

[Primary hyperaldosteronism due to unilateral adrenal hyperplasia with surgical resolution]. / Hiperaldosteronismo primario por hiperplasia suprarrenal unilateral con resolución quirúrgica.

Unilateral adrenal hyperplasia is a rare cause of primary hyperaldosteronism (around a 3%) that has surgical treatment. A case of a patient with hypertension resistant to conventional therapy in treatment with 7 drugs who presented with primary hyperaldosteronism due to unilateral adrenal hyperplasia is presented. A left adrenalectomy was performed, and the patient had a good clinical response, with no need of any drug after 2 years of surgery. Unilateral adrenal hyperplasia is a different entity and it is not an asymmetric variant of the bilateral adrenal hyperplasia. In the study of patients with primary hyperaldosteronism and imaging tests with absence of adenoma is a diagnosis that must be considered before cataloguing patients with bilateral adrenal hyperplasia and start a medical treatment, because unilateral adrenal hyperplasia would have a surgical resolution.

Prevalence and Prognostic Significance of Apparent Treatment Resistant Hypertension in Chronic Kidney Disease: Report From the Chronic Renal Insufficiency Cohort Study.

The association between apparent treatment resistant hypertension (ATRH) and clinical outcomes is not well studied in chronic kidney disease. We analyzed data on 3367 hypertensive participants in the Chronic Renal Insufficiency Cohort (CRIC) to determine prevalence, associations, and clinical outcomes of ATRH in nondialysis chronic kidney disease patients. ATRH was defined as blood pressure ≥140/90 mm Hg on ≥3 antihypertensives, or use of ≥4 antihypertensives with blood pressure at goal at baseline visit. Prevalence of ATRH was 40.4%. Older age, male sex, black race, diabetes mellitus, and higher body mass index were independently associated with higher odds of having ATRH. Participants with ATRH had a higher risk of clinical events than participants without ATRH-composite of myocardial infarction, stroke, peripheral arterial disease, congestive heart failure (CHF), and all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval], 1.38 [1.22-1.56]); renal events (1.28 [1.11-1.46]); CHF (1.66 [1.38-2.00]); and all-cause mortality (1.24 [1.06-1.45]). The subset of participants with ATRH and blood pressure at goal on ≥4 medications also had higher risk for composite of myocardial infarction, stroke, peripheral arterial disease, CHF, and all-cause mortality (hazard ratio [95% confidence interval], (1.30 [1.12-1.51]) and CHF (1.59 [1.28-1.99]) than those without ATRH. ATRH was associated with significantly higher risk for CHF and renal events only among those with estimated glomerular filtration rate ≥30 mL/min per 1.73 m(2). Our findings show that ATRH is common and associated with high risk of adverse outcomes in a cohort of patients with chronic kidney disease. This underscores the need for early identification and management of patients with ATRH and chronic kidney disease.

Randomized comparison of renal denervation versus intensified pharmacotherapy including spironolactone in true-resistant hypertension: six-month results from the Prague-15 study.

This prospective, randomized, open-label multicenter trial evaluated the efficacy of catheter-based renal denervation (Symplicity, Medtronic) versus intensified pharmacological treatment including spironolactone (if tolerated) in patients with true-resistant hypertension. This was confirmed by 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring after excluding secondary hypertension and confirmation of adherence to therapy by measurement of plasma antihypertensive drug levels before enrollment. One-hundred six patients were randomized to renal denervation (n=52), or intensified pharmacological treatment (n=54) with baseline systolic blood pressure of 159±17 and 155±17 mm Hg and average number of drugs 5.1 and 5.4, respectively. A significant reduction in 24-hour average systolic blood pressure after 6 months (-8.6 [95% cofidence interval: -11.8, -5.3] mm Hg; P<0.001 in renal denervation versus -8.1 [95% cofidence interval: -12.7, -3.4] mm Hg; P=0.001 in pharmacological group) was observed, which was comparable in both groups. Similarly, a significant reduction in systolic office blood pressure (-12.4 [95% cofidence interval: -17.0, -7.8] mm Hg; P<0.001 in renal denervation versus -14.3 [95% cofidence interval: -19.7, -8.9] mm Hg; P<0.001 in pharmacological group) was present. Between-group differences in change were not significant. The average number of antihypertensive drugs used after 6 months was significantly higher in the pharmacological group (+0.3 drugs; P<0.001). A significant increase in serum creatinine and a parallel decrease of creatinine clearance were observed in the pharmacological group; between-group difference were borderline significant. The 6-month results of this study confirmed the safety of renal denervation. In conclusion, renal denervation achieved reduction of blood pressure comparable with intensified pharmacotherapy.

Blood pressure responses to renal denervation precede and are independent of the sympathetic and baroreflex effects.

It is still largely unknown whether the neuroadrenergic responses to renal denervation (RD) are involved in its blood pressure (BP)-lowering effects and represent predictors of the BP responses to RD. In 15 treated true resistant hypertensives, we measured before and 15 days, 1, 3, and 6 months after RD clinic, ambulatory and beat-to-beat BP. Measurements included muscle sympathetic nerve traffic (MSNA), spontaneous baroreflex-MSNA sensitivity, and various humoral and metabolic variables. Twelve treated hypertensives served as controls. BP, which was unaffected 15 days after RD, showed a significant decrease during the remaining follow-up period. MSNA and baroreflex did not change at 15-day and 1-month follow-up and showed, respectively, a decrease and a specular increase at 3 and 6 months after RD. No relationship, however, was detected between baseline MSNA and baroreflex, MSNA changes and BP changes. At the 6-month follow-up, the MSNA reduction was similar for magnitude in patients displaying a BP reduction greater or lower the median value. Similarly, the BP reduction detected 6 months after RD was similar in patients displaying a MSNA reduction greater or lower median value. No significant BP and MSNA changes were detected in the control group. Thus, the BP reduction associated with RD seems to precede the MSNA changes and not to display a temporal, qualitative, and quantitative relationship with the MSNA and baroreflex effects. Given the small sample size of the present study further investigations are warranted to confirm the present findings.

Prevalence of resistant hypertension and associated factors for blood pressure control status with optimal medical therapy using Korean ambulatory blood pressure monitoring registry data.

BACKGROUND: Resistant hypertension (RH) may be one of the cause of the plateau in improving the control rate in hypertension (HT) management. The misdiagnosis of RH by clinic blood pressure (BP) is important clinical problem. Aim of the study were to investigate the prevalence of RH by ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) and the factor associated with control status of ambulatory BPs. METHODS: For 1230 subjects taking one or more antihypertensive medication (AHM) enrolled in the Korean Ambulatory Blood Pressure Monitoring (Kor-ABP) registry, the prevalence of RH was calculated which was defined as uncontrolled BP by three AHM classes including diuretic or BP in need of four or more AHM classes. The prevalence determined by clinic versus ambulatory BP was compared. RESULTS: The age was 59.3 ± 12.5 years, and 44.3 % were female (n = 1230). Among them 72 subjects were taking three AHM drugs including diuretics and 105 subjects were taking four or more AHM classes. With uncontrolled daytime ambulatory BP in 41 among 72 subjects, prevalence of RH was 11.9 % (146/1230). By using nighttime BP criteria, there was significant difference in the prevalence of RH for clinic versus nighttime BP (146/177 vs. 159/177, p = 0.0124). For control status of daytime BP, masked uncontrolled BP was 16.9 % and controlled BP with white-coat effect was 14.1 %. For nighttime BP control status, odd ratios for smoking (0.624), drinking (1.512), coronary artery disease (0.604), calcium antagonist (1.705), and loop diuretics (0.454) were all significant. CONCLUSION: The prevalence itself was 11.9 % by daytime BP and it was significantly higher when using nighttime BP criteria. Control status of daytime BP was misclassified in 31.0 %. Smoking, drinking, coronary artery disease, calcium antagonist, and loop diuretics were associated with nighttime BP control status.

Prevalence of Apparent Therapy-Resistant Hypertension and Its Effect on Outcome in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease.

New options recently became available for treatment of uncontrolled blood pressure. Information on the prevalence of therapy-resistant hypertension (TRH) in patients with chronic kidney disease and its consequences is relevant to balance risks and benefits of potential new therapies. Data of 788 patients with chronic kidney disease came from a multicenter study investigating the effect on outcome of an integrated multifactorial approach delivered by nurse practitioners added to usual care versus usual care alone. Blood pressure was measured at the office and during 30 minutes using an automated oscillometric device. Apparent TRH (aTRH) was defined as a blood pressure ≥130/80 mm Hg despite treatment with ≥3 antihypertensive drugs, including a diuretic or treatment with ≥4 antihypertensive drugs. Participants were followed up for the occurrence of myocardial infarction, stroke or cardiovascular mortality (composite cardiovascular end point) and end-stage renal disease. aTRH was present in 34% (office blood pressure) and in 32% (automated measurements). During 5.3 years of follow-up, 17% of patients with aTRH reached a cardiovascular end point and 27% reached end-stage renal disease. aTRH lead to a 1.5-fold higher risk (95% confidence interval, 0.8-3.0) of a cardiovascular end point compared with controlled hypertensives in multivariable-adjusted analysis. aTRH increased end-stage renal disease risk 2.3-fold (95% confidence interval, 1.4-3.7). During 4 years of follow-up, the prevalence of aTRH did not decline in either treatment group. The prevalence of aTRH is high in patients with chronic kidney disease even after optimization of nephrologist care. The presence of TRH is related to a substantially increased risk of renal and cardiovascular outcomes.

Multimodality Intra-Arterial Imaging Assessment of the Vascular Trauma Induced by Balloon-Based and Nonballoon-Based Renal Denervation Systems.

BACKGROUND: Renal denervation is a new treatment considered for several possible indications. As new systems are introduced, the incidence of acute renal artery wall injury with relation to the denervation method is unknown. We investigated the acute repercussion of renal denervation on the renal arteries of patients treated with balloon-based and nonballoon-based denervation systems by quantitative angiography, intravascular ultrasound, and optical coherence tomography (OCT). METHODS AND RESULTS: Twenty-five patients (50 renal arteries) underwent bilateral renal denervation with 5 different systems, 3 of which balloon-based (Paradise [n=5], Oneshot [n=6], and Vessix V2 [n=5)]) and 2 nonballoon-based (Symplicity [n=6] and EnligHTN [n=3]). Analysis included quantitative angiography and morphometric intravascular ultrasound measurements pre and post procedure and assessment of vascular trauma (dissection, edema, or thrombus) by OCT after denervation. A significant reduction in lumen size by quantitative angiography and intravascular ultrasound was observed in nonballoon denervation but not in balloon denervation. By postdenervation OCT, dissection was seen in 14 arteries (32.6%). The percentage of frames with dissection was higher in balloon-based denervation catheters. Thrombus and edema were detected in 35 (81.4%) and 32 (74.4%) arteries, respectively. In arteries treated with balloon-based denervation that had dissection by OCT, the balloon/artery ratio was higher (1.24 [1.17-1.32] versus 1.10 [1.04-1.18]; P<0.01). CONCLUSIONS: A varying extent of vascular injury was observed after renal denervation in all systems; however, different patterns were identified in balloon-based and in nonballoon-based denervation systems. In balloon denervation, the presence of dissections by OCT was associated with a higher balloon/artery ratio.

Sustained sympathetic and blood pressure reduction 1 year after renal denervation in patients with resistant hypertension.

Renal denervation (RDN) reduces muscle sympathetic nerve activity (MSNA) and blood pressure (BP) in resistant hypertension. Although a persistent BP-lowering effect has been demonstrated, the long-term effect on MSNA remains elusive. We investigated whether RDN influences MSNA over time. Office BP and MSNA were obtained at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months after RDN in 35 patients with resistant hypertension. Office BP averaged 166±22/88±19 mm Hg, despite the use of an average of 4.8±2.1 antihypertensive drugs. Baseline MSNA was 51±11 bursts/min ≈2- to 3-fold higher than the level observed in healthy controls. Mean office systolic and diastolic BP significantly decreased by -12.6±18.3/-6.5±9.2, -16.1±25.6/-8.6±12.9, and -21.2±29.1/-11.1±12.9 mm Hg (P<0.001 for both systolic BP and diastolic BP) with RDN at 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up, respectively. MSNA was reduced by -8±12, -6±12, and -6±11 bursts/min (P<0.01) at 3-, 6-, and 12-month follow-up. The reduction in MSNA was maintained, despite a progressive fall in BP over time. No such changes were observed in 7 control subjects at 6-month follow-up. These findings confirm previous reports on the favorable effects of RDN on elevated BP and demonstrate sustained reduction of central sympathetic outflow ≤1-year follow-up in patients with resistant hypertension and high baseline MSNA. These observations are compatible with the hypothesis of a substantial contribution of afferent renal nerve signaling to increased BP in resistant hypertension and argue against a relevant reinnervation at 1 year after procedure.

Eligibility for renal denervation: experience at 11 European expert centers.

Based on the SYMPLICITY studies and CE (Conformité Européenne) certification, renal denervation is currently applied as a novel treatment of resistant hypertension in Europe. However, information on the proportion of patients with resistant hypertension qualifying for renal denervation after a thorough work-up and treatment adjustment remains scarce. The aim of this study was to investigate the proportion of patients eligible for renal denervation and the reasons for noneligibility at 11 expert centers participating in the European Network COordinating Research on renal Denervation in treatment-resistant hypertension (ENCOReD). The analysis included 731 patients. Age averaged 61.6 years, office blood pressure at screening was 177/96 mm Hg, and the number of blood pressure-lowering drugs taken was 4.1. Specialists referred 75.6% of patients. The proportion of patients eligible for renal denervation according to the SYMPLICITY HTN-2 criteria and each center's criteria was 42.5% (95% confidence interval, 38.0%-47.0%) and 39.7% (36.2%-43.2%), respectively. The main reasons of noneligibility were normalization of blood pressure after treatment adjustment (46.9%), unsuitable renal arterial anatomy (17.0%), and previously undetected secondary causes of hypertension (11.1%). In conclusion, after careful screening and treatment adjustment at hypertension expert centers, only ≈40% of patients referred for renal denervation, mostly by specialists, were eligible for the procedure. The most frequent cause of ineligibility (approximately half of cases) was blood pressure normalization after treatment adjustment by a hypertension specialist. Our findings highlight that hypertension centers with a record in clinical experience and research should remain the gatekeepers before renal denervation is considered.

Vitamin D therapy to reduce blood pressure and left ventricular hypertrophy in resistant hypertension: randomized, controlled trial.

Low 25-hydroxyvitamin D levels are associated with higher prevalent blood pressure. We tested whether high-dose intermittent oral vitamin D therapy could reduce blood pressure and left ventricular mass in patients with hypertension resistant to conventional treatment. We conducted a parallel-group, double-blind, randomized placebo-controlled trial. Patients with supine office blood pressure >140/90 mm Hg on ≥3 antihypertensive agents received 100 000 U oral vitamin D3 or matching placebo every 2 months. Office and 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure, glucose, and cholesterol were measured at baseline, 2, 4, and 6 months; left ventricular mass index was measured by cardiac MRI on a subgroup at baseline and 6 months. The primary outcome was mean 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure at 6 months. A total of 68 participants were randomized, 34 in each group. Mean age was 63 (SD 11) years, mean baseline office blood pressure was 154/84 (13/10) mm Hg, and mean baseline 25-hydroxyvitamin D level was 42 (16) nmol/L. Treatment with vitamin D did not reduce 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure (adjusted treatment effects: systolic, +3 mm Hg; 95% confidence interval, -4 to +11; P=0.33; diastolic, -2 mm Hg; 95% confidence interval, -6 to +2; P=0.29); similar results were seen for office blood pressure. Left ventricular mass index was measured in a subgroup (n=25); no reduction was seen with vitamin D treatment (adjusted treatment effect, +4 g/m(2); 95% confidence interval, 0 to +7; P=0.04). There was no significant change in cholesterol or glucose levels. Thus, 6 months of intermittent, high-dose oral vitamin D3 did not reduce blood pressure or left ventricular mass in patients with resistant hypertension.

Efficacy and safety of catheter-based radiofrequency renal denervation in stented renal arteries.

BACKGROUND: In selected patients with hypertension, renal artery (RA) stenting is used to treat significant atherosclerotic stenoses. However, blood pressure often remains uncontrolled after the procedure. Although catheter-based renal denervation (RDN) can reduce blood pressure in certain patients with resistant hypertension, there are no data on the feasibility and safety of RDN in stented RA. METHODS AND RESULTS: We report marked blood pressure reduction after RDN in a patient with resistant hypertension who underwent previous stenting. Subsequently, radiofrequency ablation was investigated within the stented segment of porcine RA, distal to the stented segment, and in nonstented RA and compared with stent only and untreated controls. There were neither observations of thrombus nor gross or histological changes in the kidneys. After radiofrequency ablation of the nonstented RA, sympathetic nerves innervating the kidney were significantly reduced, as indicated by significant decreases in sympathetic terminal axons and reduction of norepinephrine in renal tissue. Similar denervation efficacy was found when RDN was performed distal to a renal stent. In contrast, when radiofrequency ablation was performed within the stented segment of the RA, significant sympathetic nerve ablation was not seen. Histological observation showed favorable healing in all arteries. CONCLUSIONS: Radiofrequency ablation of previously stented RA demonstrated that RDN provides equally safe experimental procedural outcomes in a porcine model whether the radiofrequency treatment is delivered within, adjacent, or without the stent struts being present in the RA. However, efficacious RDN is only achieved when radiofrequency ablation is delivered to the nonstented RA segment distal to the stent.