-
Journal of Cardiovascular... May 2021Ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) are a major cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with heart disease. Recent studies evaluated the effect of renal denervation (RDN)... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
INTRODUCTION
Ventricular arrhythmias (VAs) are a major cause of morbidity and mortality in patients with heart disease. Recent studies evaluated the effect of renal denervation (RDN) on the occurrence of VAs. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the efficacy and safety of this procedure.
METHODS AND RESULTS
A systematic search of the literature was performed to identify studies that evaluated the use of RDN for the management of VAs. Primary outcomes were reduction in the number of VAs and implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapies. Secondary outcomes were changes in blood pressure and renal function. Ten studies (152 patients) were included in the meta-analysis. RDN was associated with a reduction in the number of VAs, antitachycardia pacing, ICD shocks, and overall ICD therapies of 3.53 events/patient/month (95% confidence interval [CI] = -5.48 to -1.57), 2.86 events/patient/month (95% CI = -4.09 to -1.63), 2.04 events/patient/month (95% CI = -2.12 to -1.97), and 2.68 events/patient/month (95% CI = -3.58 to -1.78), respectively. Periprocedural adverse events occurred in 1.23% of patients and no significant changes were seen in blood pressure or renal function.
CONCLUSIONS
In patients with refractory VAs, RDN was associated with a reduction in the number of VAs and ICD therapies, and was shown to be a safe procedure.
Topics: Arrhythmias, Cardiac; Defibrillators, Implantable; Denervation; Humans; Kidney; Tachycardia, Ventricular; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 33724602
DOI: 10.1111/jce.15004 -
Hand (New York, N.Y.) Mar 2023Joint denervation has been proposed as a less invasive option for surgical management of hand arthritis that preserves joint anatomy while treating pain and decreasing... (Review)
Review
Joint denervation has been proposed as a less invasive option for surgical management of hand arthritis that preserves joint anatomy while treating pain and decreasing postoperative recovery times. The purpose of this systematic review was to investigate the efficacy and safety of surgical joint denervation for osteoarthritis in the joints of the hand. EMBASE, MEDLINE, and PubMed databases were searched from January 2000 to March 2019. Studies of adult patients with rheumatoid arthritis or osteoarthritis of the hand who underwent joint denervation surgery were included. Two reviewers performed the screening process, data abstraction, and risk of bias assessment (Methodological Index for Non-Randomized Studies). This review followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and was registered with PROSPERO (#125811). Ten studies were included, 9 case series and 1 cohort study, with a total of 192 patients. In all studies, joint denervation improved pain and hand function at follow-up (M = 36.8 months, range = 3-90 months). Pooled analysis of 3 studies on the first carpometacarpal joint showed a statistically significant ( < .001) reduction in pain scores from baseline (M = 6.61 ± 2.03) to postoperatively (M = 1.69 ± 1.27). The combined complication rate was 18.8% (n = 36 of 192), with neuropathic pain or unintended sensory loss (8.8%, n = 17 of 192) being the most common. This review suggests that denervation may be an effective and low-morbidity procedure for treating arthritis of the hand. Prospective, comparative studies are required to further understand the outcomes of denervation compared with traditional surgical interventions.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Cohort Studies; Prospective Studies; Osteoarthritis; Pain; Denervation
PubMed: 33648375
DOI: 10.1177/1558944721994251 -
European Journal of Internal Medicine Jul 2023There is a lack of consensus regarding the best add on therapy for treatment of resistant hypertension (RH). This is likely secondary to a paucity of data on the... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
INTRODUCTION
There is a lack of consensus regarding the best add on therapy for treatment of resistant hypertension (RH). This is likely secondary to a paucity of data on the comparative effectiveness of proposed therapies for RH.
METHODS
Placebo-controlled and sham-controlled randomized clinical trials testing therapies for the treatment of RH were included in this meta-analysis. Therapies with two or more studies were included as subgroups in this meta-analysis. The primary outcomes being tested were 24-hr systolic blood pressure (SBP) and office SBP.
RESULTS
Eight studies were identified that tested mineralocorticoid receptor antagonist (MRA) including 1,414 participants. The raw mean difference (RMD) between MRA and placebo control was statistically significant for 24-hour SBP (-10.56 mmHg; 95% confidence interval (CI) -12.82 to -8.30), 24-hour diastolic (DBP) (-5.48 mmHg; 95% CI -8.48 to -2.58), office SBP (-11.97 mmHg; 95% CI -16.41 to -7.54), and office DBP (-4.14 mmHg; 95% CI -5.62 to -2.65). Six studies were identified that tested renal denervation (RD) including 989 participants. The RMD between RD and sham control was not statistically significant for 24-hour SBP (-1.84 mmHg; 95% CI -3.92 to 0.24), 24-hour DBP (-0.66 mmHg; 95% CI -1.85 to 0.54), office SBP (-1.57 mmHg; 95% CI -6.04 to 2.89), and office DBP (-1.49 mmHg; 95% CI -3.52 to 0.55). Four studies were identified that tested endothelin receptor antagonists (ERA) including 1,193 participants. The raw mean difference (RMD) between ERA and placebo control was statistically significant for 24-hr systolic (SBP) (-7.02 mmHg; 95% CI -9.15 to -4.90, 24-hr diastolic (DBP) (-6.22 mmHg; 95% CI -7.61 to -4.82), office SBP (-5.84 mmHg; 95% CI -10.08 to -1.60), and office DBP (-3.73 mmHg; 95% CI -5.87 to -1.59).
DISCUSSION
MRA lowers BP in patients with RH more than RD, which seems to have little to no effect in RH. ERAs lead to a statistically significant reduction in BP but the confidence in efficacy is limited due to the low number of studies and differences in trial population. Individual factors and their impact on treatment response in RH should be investigated in future research.
Topics: Humans; Hypertension; Blood Pressure; Kidney; Antihypertensive Agents; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37150718
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejim.2023.04.021 -
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Nov 2023Minimally invasive techniques for treatment-resistant migraine have been developed on recent insights into the peripheral pathogenesis of migraines. Although there is a... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Minimally invasive techniques for treatment-resistant migraine have been developed on recent insights into the peripheral pathogenesis of migraines. Although there is a growing body of evidence supporting these techniques, no study has yet compared the effects of these treatments on headache frequency, severity, duration, and cost.
METHODS
PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library databases were searched to identify randomized placebo-controlled trials that compared radiofrequency ablation, botulinum toxin type A (BT-A), nerve block, neurostimulation, or migraine surgery to placebo for preventive treatment. Data on changes from baseline to follow-up in headache frequency, severity, duration, and quality of life were analyzed.
RESULTS
A total of 30 randomized controlled trials and 2680 patients were included. Compared with placebo, there was a significant decrease in headache frequency in patients with nerve block ( P = 0.04) and surgery ( P < 0.001). Headache severity decreased in all treatments. Duration of headaches was significantly reduced in the BT-A ( P < 0.001) and surgery cohorts ( P = 0.01). Quality of life improved significantly in patients with BT-A, nerve stimulator, and migraine surgery. Migraine surgery had the longest lasting effects (11.5 months) compared with nerve ablation (6 months), BT-A (3.2 months), and nerve block (11.9 days).
CONCLUSIONS
Migraine surgery is a cost-effective, long-term treatment to reduce headache frequency, severity, and duration without significant risk of complication. BT-A reduces headache severity and duration, but it is short-lasting and associated with greater adverse events and lifetime cost. Although efficacious, radiofrequency ablation and implanted nerve stimulators have high risks of adverse events and explantation, whereas benefits of nerve blocks are short in duration.
Topics: Humans; Quality of Life; Migraine Disorders; Botulinum Toxins, Type A; Headache; Nerve Block; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36940145
DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000010429 -
JACC. Cardiovascular Interventions Dec 2021The authors performed an updated meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials of renal denervation and specifically compared the effect of renal denervation in... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
OBJECTIVES
The authors performed an updated meta-analysis of randomized placebo-controlled trials of renal denervation and specifically compared the effect of renal denervation in patients taking medications and in those not taking medications.
BACKGROUND
Renal denervation has now undergone several blinded placebo-controlled trials, covering the spectrum from patients with drug-resistant hypertension to those not yet taking antihypertensive medications.
METHODS
All blinded placebo-controlled randomized trials of catheter-based renal sympathetic denervation for hypertension were systematically identified, and a random-effects meta-analysis was performed. The primary efficacy outcome was the change in ambulatory systolic blood pressure beyond the effect of the placebo procedure. Analysis was stratified by whether there was background antihypertensive medication use.
RESULTS
There were 7 eligible trials, totaling 1,368 patients. Denervation significantly reduced ambulatory systolic (mean difference -3.61 mm Hg; 95% CI: -4.89 to -2.33 mm Hg; P < 0.0001), ambulatory diastolic (-1.85 mm Hg; 95% CI: -2.78 to -0.92 mm Hg; P < 0.0001), office systolic (-5.86 mm Hg; 95% CI: -7.77 to -3.94 mm Hg; P < 0.0001), and office diastolic (-3.63 mm Hg; 95% CI: -4.77 to -2.50; P < 0.0001) blood pressure. There was no evidence that the use of concomitant antihypertensive medication had a significant impact on the effect of denervation on any of these endpoints (P = NS for each comparison).
CONCLUSIONS
The randomized placebo-controlled trials show consistently that renal denervation provides significant reduction in ambulatory and office blood pressure. Although the magnitude of benefit, about 4/2 mm Hg, is modest, it is similar between patients on background antihypertensive medications and those who are not. Denervation could therefore be a useful strategy at various points for patients who are not willing to add antihypertensive agents. Whether the effect changes with time is currently unknown.
Topics: Antihypertensive Agents; Blood Pressure; Blood Pressure Monitoring, Ambulatory; Humans; Hypertension; Kidney; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Sympathectomy; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 34743900
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcin.2021.09.020 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Nov 2021Resistant hypertension is highly prevalent among the general hypertensive population and the clinical management of this condition remains problematic. Different... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Resistant hypertension is highly prevalent among the general hypertensive population and the clinical management of this condition remains problematic. Different approaches, including a more intensified antihypertensive therapy, lifestyle modifications or both, have largely failed to improve patients' outcomes and to reduce cardiovascular and renal risk. As renal sympathetic hyperactivity is a major driver of resistant hypertension, in the last decade renal sympathetic ablation (renal denervation) has been proposed as a possible therapeutic alternative to treat this condition.
OBJECTIVES
We sought to evaluate the short- and long-term effects of renal denervation in individuals with resistant hypertension on clinical end points, including fatal and non-fatal cardiovascular events, all-cause mortality, hospital admissions, quality of life, blood pressure control, left ventricular hypertrophy, cardiovascular and metabolic profile and kidney function, as well as the potential adverse events related to the procedure.
SEARCH METHODS
For this updated review, the Cochrane Hypertension Information Specialist searched the following databases for randomised controlled trials up to 3 November 2020: Cochrane Hypertension's Specialised Register, CENTRAL (2020, Issue 11), Ovid MEDLINE, and Ovid Embase. The World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (via CENTRAL) and the US National Institutes of Health Ongoing Trials Register ClinicalTrials.gov were searched for ongoing trials. We also contacted authors of relevant papers regarding further published and unpublished work. The searches had no language restrictions.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We considered randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared renal denervation to standard therapy or sham procedure to treat resistant hypertension, without language restriction.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Two authors independently extracted data and assessed study risk of bias. We summarised treatment effects on available clinical outcomes and adverse events using random-effects meta-analyses. We assessed heterogeneity in estimated treatment effects using Chi² and I² statistics. We calculated summary treatment estimates as a mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) for continuous outcomes, and a risk ratio (RR) for dichotomous outcomes, together with their 95% confidence intervals (CI). Certainty of evidence has been assessed using the GRADE approach.
MAIN RESULTS
We found 15 eligible studies (1416 participants). In four studies, renal denervation was compared to sham procedure; in the remaining studies, renal denervation was tested against standard or intensified antihypertensive therapy. Most studies had unclear or high risk of bias for allocation concealment and blinding. When compared to control, there was low-certainty evidence that renal denervation had little or no effect on the risk of myocardial infarction (4 studies, 742 participants; RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.45 to 3.84), ischaemic stroke (5 studies, 892 participants; RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.33 to 2.95), unstable angina (3 studies, 270 participants; RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.09 to 2.89) or hospitalisation (3 studies, 743 participants; RR 1.24, 95% CI 0.50 to 3.11). Based on moderate-certainty evidence, renal denervation may reduce 24-hour ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) systolic BP (9 studies, 1045 participants; MD -5.29 mmHg, 95% CI -10.46 to -0.13), ABPM diastolic BP (8 studies, 1004 participants; MD -3.75 mmHg, 95% CI -7.10 to -0.39) and office diastolic BP (8 studies, 1049 participants; MD -4.61 mmHg, 95% CI -8.23 to -0.99). Conversely, this procedure had little or no effect on office systolic BP (10 studies, 1090 participants; MD -5.92 mmHg, 95% CI -12.94 to 1.10). Moderate-certainty evidence suggested that renal denervation may not reduce serum creatinine (5 studies, 721 participants, MD 0.03 mg/dL, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.13) and may not increase the estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) or creatinine clearance (6 studies, 822 participants; MD -2.56 mL/min, 95% CI -7.53 to 2.42). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: In patients with resistant hypertension, there is low-certainty evidence that renal denervation does not improve major cardiovascular outomes and renal function. Conversely, moderate-certainty evidence exists that it may improve 24h ABPM and diastolic office-measured BP. Future trials measuring patient-centred instead of surrogate outcomes, with longer follow-up periods, larger sample size and more standardised procedural methods are necessary to clarify the utility of this procedure in this population.
Topics: Antihypertensive Agents; Blood Pressure; Denervation; Humans; Hypertension; Kidney
PubMed: 34806762
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011499.pub3 -
Journal of Human Hypertension Oct 2022The study aims to compare clinical outcomes following renal denervation (RDN) in hypertensive patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Three online databases were... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
The study aims to compare clinical outcomes following renal denervation (RDN) in hypertensive patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). Three online databases were searched (MEDLINE, EMBASE and PubMed) for literature related to outcomes of RDN on hypertension and AF, between January 1, 2010, and June 1, 2021. Where possible, risk ratios (RR) and mean differences (MD) were combined using a random effects model. Significance was set at p ≤ 0.05. Seven trials were included that assessed the effect of adding RDN to pulmonary vein isolation (PVI) in patients with hypertension and AF. A total of 711 patients (329 undergoing PVI + RDN and 382 undergoing PVI alone), with an age range of 56 ± 6 to 68 ± 9 years, were included. Pooled analysis showed a significant lowering of AF recurrence in the PVI + RDN (31.3%) group compared to the PVI-only (52.9%) group (p < 0.00001). Pooled analysis of patients with resistant hypertension showed a significant mean reduction of systolic blood pressure (SBP) (-9.42 mm Hg, p = 0.05), but not diastolic blood pressure (DBP) (-4.11 mm Hg, p = 0.16) in favor of PVI + RDN. Additionally, the pooled analysis showed that PVI + RDN significantly improved estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) (+10.2 mL/min per 1.73 m, p < 0.001) compared to PVI alone. RDN procedures in these trials have proven to be both safe and efficacious with an overall complication rate of 6.32%. Combined PVI and RDN is beneficial for patients with hypertension and AF. Combined therapy showed improvement in SBP and eGFR, reducing the risk of AF recurrence. RDN may serve as an innovative intervention in the treatment of AF.
Topics: Atrial Fibrillation; Catheter Ablation; Humans; Hypertension; Recurrence; Renal Artery; Sympathectomy; Treatment Outcome
PubMed: 35094013
DOI: 10.1038/s41371-022-00658-0 -
Frontiers in Surgery 2023Endoscopic thoracic sympathectomy (ETS) surgery is a highly effective treatment of primary hyperhidrosis (PH) for the palms, face, axillae. Compensatory sweating (CS) is... (Review)
Review
Endoscopic thoracic sympathectomy (ETS) surgery is a highly effective treatment of primary hyperhidrosis (PH) for the palms, face, axillae. Compensatory sweating (CS) is the most common and feared side effect of thoracic sympathectomy. CS is a phenomenon characterized by increased sweating in sites distal to the level of sympathectomy. Compensatory sweating is the main problem for which many patients give up surgery, losing the chance to solve their problem and accepting a poor quality of life. There are still no treatments that offer reliable solutions for compensatory sweating. The treatments proposed in the literature are scarce, with low case histories, and with uncertain results. Factors associated with CS are extension of manipulation of the sympathetic chain, level of sympathetic denervation, and body mass index. Therapeutic options include non surgical treatment and surgical treatment. Non surgical treatments include topical agents, botulinum toxin, systemic anticholinergics, iontophoresis. Surgical treatments include clip removal, extended sympathectomy and sympathetic chain reconstruction, although the efficacy is not well-established for all the methods. In this review we provide an overview of the treatments and outcomes described in the literature for the management of compensatory CS, with focus on surgical treatment.
PubMed: 37035574
DOI: 10.3389/fsurg.2023.1160827 -
Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine Oct 2023Delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI) is the second-leading cause of death and disability in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH), and is associated with... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND/IMPORTANCE
Delayed cerebral ischemia (DCI) is the second-leading cause of death and disability in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage (aSAH), and is associated with cerebral arterial vasospasm (CAV). Current treatments for CAV are expensive, invasive, and have limited efficacy. Cervical sympathetic block (CSB) is an underappreciated, but potentially highly effective therapy for CAV.
OBJECTIVE
To provide a comprehensive review of the preclinical and human literature pertinent to CSB in the context of CAV.
EVIDENCE REVIEW
This study followed Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. We conducted a literature search using Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Scopus and Web of Science until February 2022, to identify abstracts, conference proceedings, and full-text papers pertinent to cervical sympathectomy and CAV in animal/adult patients.
FINDINGS
We included six human and six experimental studies. Human studies were mostly prospective observational, except one retrospective and one randomized clinical trial, and used various imaging modalities to measure changes in arterial diameter after the block. Studies that used digital subtraction angiography showed an improvement in cerebral perfusion without change in vessel diameter. Transcranial Doppler studies found an approximately 15% statistically significant decrease in velocities consistent with arterial vasodilatation. Overall, the results suggest an increase in cerebral arterial diameter and neurological improvement in patients receiving a CSB. Animal studies demonstrate that sympathetic system ablation vasodilates cerebral vasculature and decreases the incidence of symptomatic vasospasm.
CONCLUSIONS
This scoping review suggests that CSB may be a viable option for treatment and prevention of CAV/DCI in patients with aSAH, although the included studies were heterogeneous, mostly observational, and with a small sample size. Further research is needed to standardize the technique and prove its effectiveness to treat patients suffering of CAV/DCI after aSAH.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Retrospective Studies; Vasospasm, Intracranial; Subarachnoid Hemorrhage; Brain Ischemia; Sympathectomy; Observational Studies as Topic; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 36424089
DOI: 10.1136/rapm-2022-103999 -
The Journal of Arthroplasty Oct 2022Regional nerve blocks are widely used in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) to reduce postoperative pain and opioid consumption. The purpose of our study was to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Regional nerve blocks are widely used in primary total knee arthroplasty (TKA) to reduce postoperative pain and opioid consumption. The purpose of our study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of regional nerve blocks after TKA in support of the combined clinical practice guidelines of the American Association of Hip and Knee Surgeons, American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons, Hip Society, Knee Society, and American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Management.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for studies published before March 24, 2020 on femoral nerve block, adductor canal block, and infiltration between Popliteal Artery and Capsule of Knee in primary TKA. All included studies underwent qualitative and quantitative homogeneity testing followed by a systematic review and direct comparison meta-analysis to assess the efficacy and safety of the regional nerve blocks compared to a control, local peri-articular anesthetic infiltration (PAI), or between regional nerve blocks.
RESULTS
Critical appraisal of 1,673 publications yielded 56 publications representing the best available evidence for analysis. Femoral nerve and adductor canal blocks are effective at reducing postoperative pain and opioid consumption, but femoral nerve blocks are associated with quadriceps weakness. Use of a continuous compared to single shot adductor canal block can improve postoperative analgesia. No difference was noted between an adductor canal block or PAI regarding postoperative pain and opioid consumption, but the combination of both may be more effective.
CONCLUSION
Single shot adductor canal block or PAI should be used to reduce postoperative pain and opioid consumption following TKA. Use of a continuous adductor canal block or a combination of single shot adductor canal block and PAI may improve postoperative analgesia in patients with concern of poor postoperative pain control.
Topics: Analgesics, Opioid; Anesthetics; Anesthetics, Local; Arthroplasty, Replacement, Knee; Femoral Nerve; Humans; Nerve Block; Pain, Postoperative
PubMed: 36162923
DOI: 10.1016/j.arth.2022.03.078