Renal denervation in a patient with a highly tortuous renal artery using a guide extension catheter: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Catheter-based renal denervation (RDN) has been introduced to treat resistant hypertension. Although the technology of RDN has been largely improved, denervation of tortuous renal arteries remains challenging. CASE PRESENTATION: This is a case report of a 49-year-old man with drug resistant hypertension. The patient was selected for RDN after ruling out possible causes of secondary hypertension. Computed tomography angiography showed a highly tortuous left renal artery. An Iberis multielectrode ablation catheter failed to reach the target vessel with a regular guiding catheter. A 5-French extension catheter was introduced into the proximal segment of the main left renal artery to provide extra support force, which enabled successful ablation of the highly tortuous left renal artery. His ambulatory blood pressure was significantly decreased at 1 month follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: It is feasible and effective to use a guide extension catheter for denervation of highly tortuous renal arteries. The present study provides a useful method to ablate tortuous and angled renal arteries and branches.

Renal Innervation in Resistant Hypertension: A Review of Pathophysiology and Renal Denervation as Potential Treatment.

BACKGROUND: Advances in treatment and increased awareness have improved the prognosis for many patients with hypertension (HTN). Resistant hypertension (RH) refers to a subset of hypertensive individuals who fail to achieve a desired blood pressure (BP) despite concurrent use of 3 different classes antihypertensive agents, one being a diuretic, and proper lifestyle changes. The prevalence and prognosis of RH are unclear owing to its heterogeneous etiologies, risk factors, and secondary comorbidities. Previous research has provided evidence that increased renal sympathetic nerve activity (RSNA) within the renal artery contributes to RH development. Renal denervation (RDN) is a procedure that attempts to ameliorate the effects of heightened RSNA via ablation renal sympathetic fibers. BP reductions associated with RDN may be attributed to decreased norepinephrine spillover, restoration of natriuresis, increasing renal blood flow, and lowering plasma renin activity. Early clinical trials perpetuated positive results, and enthusiasm grew exponentially. However, recent clinical trials have called into question RDN's efficacy. Numerous limitations must be addressed to discern the true effectiveness of RDN as a therapeutic option for RH. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to review the current understanding of RH, the anatomy of renal arteries, physiology of RH on renal arteries, anatomical pathways of the sympathetic involved in RH, RDN as a treatment option, and all relevant clinical trials treating RH with RDN. METHODS: We piloted a MEDLINE® database search of literature extending from 1980 to 2017, with emphasis on the previous five years, combining keywords such as "resistant hypertension" and "renal denervation." CONCLUSION: A plethora of information is available regarding heightened RSNA leading to RH. RDN as a possible treatment option has shown a range of results. Reconciling RDN's true efficacy requires future trials to increased sites of nerve ablation, standardized protocol, increased anatomical understanding per individual basis, stricter guidelines regarding study design, increased operator experience, and integrating the use of a multielectrode catheter.

Bilateral sphenopalatine ganglion block reduces blood pressure in never treated patients with essential hypertension. A randomized controlled single-blinded study.

BACKGROUND: Sympathetic fibers connect sphenopalatine ganglion (SPG) with the central nervous system. We aimed to study the effect of SPG block in blood pressure (BP) in never treated patients with stage I-II essential hypertension. METHODS: We performed bilateral SPG block with lidocaine 2% in 33 hypertensive patients (mean age 48±12years, 24 men) and a sham operation with water for injection in 11 patients who served as the control group (mean age 51±12years, 8 men). All patients have been subjected to 24h ambulatory blood pressure monitoring prior and a month after the SBG block in order to estimate any differences in blood pressure parameters. We defined as responders to SBG block those patients with a 24h SBP decrease ≥5mmHg. RESULTS: We found that 24h and daytime DBP (p=0.02) as well as daytime DBP load (p=0.03) were decreased in the study group a month after SPG block. In addition, a significant response was noted in 12/33 responders (36%) regarding: a. SBP and DBP during overall 24h and daytime (p<0.001) and night-time periods, b. pre-awake and early morning SBP and c. SBP (daytime and night-time) and DBP (daytime) load. No differences regarding BP were found in the sham operation group. CONCLUSIONS: SPG block is a promising, minimally invasive option of BP decrease in hypertensives, probably through SNS modulation. Additionally, due to its anesthetic effect, SPG block might act as a method of selection for those hypertensive patients with an activated SNS before any other invasive antihypertensive procedure.

The effect of renal denervation on arterial stiffness, central blood pressure and heart rate variability in treatment resistant essential hypertension: a substudy of a randomized sham-controlled double-blinded trial (the ReSET trial).

OBJECTIVES: To investigate, whether renal denervation (RDN) improves arterial stiffness, central blood pressure (C-BP) and heart rate variability (HRV) in patients with treatment resistant hypertension. METHODS: ReSET was a randomized, sham-controlled, double-blinded trial (NCT01459900). RDN was performed by a single experienced operator using the Medtronic unipolar Symplicity FlexTM catheter. C-BP, carotid-femoral pulse wave velocity (PWV), and HRV were obtained at baseline and after six months with the SphygmoCor®-device. RESULTS: Fifty-three patients (77% of the ReSET-cohort) were included in this substudy. The groups were similar at baseline (SHAM/RDN): n = 27/n = 26; 78/65% males; age 59 ± 9/54 ± 8 years (mean ± SD); systolic brachial BP 158 ± 18/154 ± 17 mmHg; systolic 24-hour ambulatory BP 153 ± 14/151 ± 13 mmHg. Changes in PWV (0.1 ± 1.9 (SHAM) vs. -0.6 ± 1.3 (RDN) m/s), systolic C-BP (-2 ± 17 (SHAM) vs. -8 ± 16 (RDN) mmHg), diastolic C-BP (-2 ± 9 (SHAM) vs. -5 ± 9 (RDN) mmHg), and augmentation index (0.7 ± 7.0 (SHAM) vs. 1.0 ± 7.4 (RDN) %) were not significantly different after six months. Changes in HRV-parameters were also not significantly different. Baseline HRV or PWV did not predict BP-response after RDN. CONCLUSIONS: In a sham-controlled setting, there were no significant effects of RDN on arterial stiffness, C-BP and HRV. Thus, the idea of BP-independent effects of RDN on large arteries and cardiac autonomic activity is not supported.