Effect of Alcohol-Mediated Renal Denervation on Blood Pressure in the Presence of Antihypertensive Medications: Primary Results From the TARGET BP I Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Renal denervation (RDN) has demonstrated clinically relevant reductions in blood pressure (BP) among individuals with uncontrolled hypertension despite lifestyle intervention and medications. The safety and effectiveness of alcohol-mediated RDN have not been formally studied in this indication. METHODS: TARGET BP I is a prospective, international, sham-controlled, randomized, patient- and assessor-blinded trial investigating the safety and efficacy of alcohol-mediated RDN. Patients with office systolic BP (SBP) ≥150 and ≤180 mm Hg, office diastolic BP ≥90 mm Hg, and mean 24-hour ambulatory SBP ≥135 and ≤170 mm Hg despite prescription of 2 to 5 antihypertensive medications were enrolled. The primary end point was the baseline-adjusted change in mean 24-hour ambulatory SBP 3 months after the procedure. Secondary end points included mean between-group differences in office and ambulatory BP at additional time points. RESULTS: Among 301 patients randomized 1:1 to RDN or sham control, RDN was associated with a significant reduction in 24-hour ambulatory SBP at 3 months (mean±SD, -10.0±14.2 mm Hg versus -6.8±12.1 mm Hg; treatment difference, -3.2 mm Hg [95% CI, -6.3 to 0.0]; P=0.0487). Subgroup analysis of the primary end point revealed no significant interaction across predefined subgroups. At 3 months, the mean change in office SBP was -12.7±18.3 and -9.7±17.3 mm Hg (difference, -3.0 [95% CI, -7.0 to 1.0]; P=0.173) for RDN and sham, respectively. No significant differences in ambulatory or office diastolic BP were observed. Adverse safety events through 6 months were uncommon, with one instance of accessory renal artery dissection in the RDN group (0.7%). No significant between-group differences in medication changes or patient adherence were identified. CONCLUSIONS: Alcohol-mediated RDN was associated with a modest but statistically significant reduction in 24-hour ambulatory SBP compared with sham control. No significant differences between groups in office BP or 6-month major adverse events were observed. REGISTRATION: URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov; Unique identifier: NCT02910414.

Long term outcomes in diabetic patients treated with atherectomy for peripheral artery disease.

BACKGROUND: The prevalence of diabetes has increased significantly in well-developed countries during the last decade and it continues to grow. Diabetes increases the risk of restenosis in patients treated percutaneously for peripheral artery disease. The present study sought to compare outcomes of atherectomy treatment in diabetic (DM) vs. non-diabetic (nDM) patients suffering from peripheral artery disease. METHOD: Between 2008 and 2012, 204 revascularization atherectomy procedures were performed on arteries of the lower extremities. The endpoints included target lesion revascularization (TLR), amputation and death. The type of atherectomy (excisional-soft plaque, orbital-calcified plaque, with active aspiration - with a thrombus) was left to operator discretion. RESULTS: This study contains 132 DM (66% male, age 68 ± 11.2 years) and 72 nDM (63% male, age 75 ± 11.3 years) subjects. DM were younger but had a higher prevalence of coronary artery disease (DM: 91% vs. nDM: 62%, p < 0.0001) and end-stage renal disease (DM: 22% vs. nDM: 2.5%, p < 0.0001). There were no differences in critical limb ischemia between the groups (DM: 21% vs. nDM: 12%, p = = 0.13). Mean time of follow-up was 384 and 411 days in DM and nDM, respectively (p = 0.43). There were no significant differences in TLR (DM: 15.2% vs. nDM: 22.2%, p = 0.249), amputations (DM: 3.0% vs. nDM: 1.5%, p = NS) or death rates (DM: 2.2% vs. nDM: 2.7%, p = NS). Kaplan-Mayer analysis showed no significant differences between the groups in the time to TLR, amputation or death. CONCLUSIONS: Plaque modification with adjusted atherectomy appears to have similar outcomes in diabetic as well as in non-diabetic patients. Nonetheless, a randomized study would be warranted to confirm the findings of the current study.