Table 1

Key characteristics of important randomised controlled RDN trials

Trial, year of publicationInvestigational deviceDesign (randomisation ratio)Sample sizeInclusion criteriaPrimary efficacy outcomeBP reduction in RDN vs control group
Randomised controlled trials
Symplicity HTN-2, 201092Symplicity Flex (mono-electrode RF)Open-label, RDN vs control (1:1)106Uncontrolled office BP on ≥3 antihypertensive drugsChange in office SBP at 6 months−32 ± 23 vs −1 ± 21 mmHg; p < 0.0001
DENERHTN, 201593Symplicity Flex (mono-electrode RF)Open-label, SSAHT + RDN vs SSAHT (1:1)106Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP on ≥3 antihypertensive drugsChange in daytime ambulatory SBP at 6 months−9.9 (95% CI: −13.6 to −6.2) vs −5.9 mmHg (95% CI: −11.3 to −0.5); p = 0.033
RADIOSOUND-HTN, 201994Symplicity Spyral (multi-electrode RF) vs Paradise (US)US-RDN vs RF-RDN of the main artery vs RF-RDN of main artery vs RF-RDN of the branches, and accessory arteries (1:1:1)120Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP on ≥3 antihypertensive drugsChange in daytime ambulatory SBP at 3 monthsUS: −13.2 ± 13.7 mmHg vs RF main artery: 6.5 ± 10.3 mmHg vs RF including branches: −8.3 ± 11.7 mmHg (p = 0.043 for US vs RF main artery; p > 0.99 for RF main artery vs RF branches)
First-generation randomised sham-controlled trials
Symplicity HTN-3, 201416Symplicity Flex (mono-electrode RF)RDN vs sham (2:1)535Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP on ≥3 antihypertensive drugsChange in office SBP at 6 months−14.1 ± 23.9 vs −11.7 ± 25.9 mmHg; p = 0.27
RSD-Leipzig, 201595Symplicity Flex (mono-electrode RF)RDN vs sham (1:1)71Uncontrolled 24-hr BP on ≥3 antihypertensive drugsChange in 24-hr SBP at 6 months−7.0 (95% CI: −10.8 to −3.2) vs −3.5 mmHg (95% CI: −6.7 to −0.2); p = 0.15
ReSET, 201696Symplicity Flex (mono-electrode RF)RDN vs sham (1:1)69Uncontrolled daytime ambulatory BP on ≥3 antihypertensive drugsChange in daytime ambulatory SBP at 6 months−6.1 ± 18.9 vs −4.3 ± 15.1 mmHg; p = 0.66
WAVE IV, 201797Externally delivered therapeutic US energy (surround sound system)RDN vs sham (1:1)81Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP on ≥3 antihypertensive drugsChange in office SBP−13.2 ± 20 vs −18.9 ± 14 mmHg; p = 0.181
REDUCE-HTN: REINFORCE, 202098Vessix (multi-electrode RF)RDN vs sham (2:1)51Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP in absence of antihypertensive drugsChange in 24-hr SBP at 2 months−5.3 (95% CI: −8.8 to −1.8) vs −8.5 mmHg (95% CI: −13.3 to −3.8); p = 0.30
Second-generation randomised sham-controlled trials
SPYRAL HTN-OFF MED Pilot, 20179Symplicity Spyral (multi-electrode RF)RDN vs sham (1:1)80Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP in the absence of antihypertensive drugsChange in 24-hr SBP at 3 months−5.5 (95% CI: −9.1 to −2.0) vs −0.5 mmHg (95% CI: −3.9 to 2.90); p = 0.0414
RADIANCE-HTN SOLO, 201812Paradise (US)RDN vs sham (1:1)146Uncontrolled daytime ambulatory BP in the absence of antihypertensive drugsChange in daytime ambulatory SBP at 2 months−8.5 ± 9.3 vs −2.2 ± 10.0 mmHg; p = 0.0001
SPYRAL HTN-ON MED, 201810Symplicity Spyral (multi-electrode RF)RDN vs sham (1:1)80Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP on 1 to 3 antihypertensive drugsChange in 24-hr SBP at 6 months−9.0 (95% CI: −12.7 to −5.3) vs −1.6 mmHg (95% CI: −5.2 to 2.0); p = 0.006
SPYRAL HTN-OFF MED Pivotal, 202011Symplicity Spyral (multi-electrode RF)Bayesian adaptive design, RDN vs sham (1:1)331Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP, in the absence of antihypertensive drugsChange in 24-hr SBP at 3 months−4.7 (95% CI: −6.4 to −2.9) vs −0.6 mmHg (95% CI: −2.1 to 0.9); p = 0.0005
RADIANCE-HTN TRIO, 202113Paradise (US)RDN vs sham (1:1)136Uncontrolled office and daytime ambulatory BP on 3 antihypertensive drugsChange in daytime ambulatory SBP at 2 months−8.0 (IQR −16.4, 0.0) vs −3.0 mmHg (IQR −10.3, 1.8); p = 0.022
REQUIRE, 202219Paradise (US)RDN vs sham (1:1)143Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP on ≥3 antihypertensive drugsChange in daytime ambulatory SBP at 3 months−6.6 (95% CI: −10.4 to −2.8) vs −6.5 mmHg (95% CI: −10.3 to −2.7); p = 0.971
Trial, year of publicationInvestigational deviceDesign (randomisation ratio)Sample sizeInclusion criteriaPrimary efficacy outcomeBP reduction in RDN vs control group
Randomised controlled trials
Symplicity HTN-2, 201092Symplicity Flex (mono-electrode RF)Open-label, RDN vs control (1:1)106Uncontrolled office BP on ≥3 antihypertensive drugsChange in office SBP at 6 months−32 ± 23 vs −1 ± 21 mmHg; p < 0.0001
DENERHTN, 201593Symplicity Flex (mono-electrode RF)Open-label, SSAHT + RDN vs SSAHT (1:1)106Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP on ≥3 antihypertensive drugsChange in daytime ambulatory SBP at 6 months−9.9 (95% CI: −13.6 to −6.2) vs −5.9 mmHg (95% CI: −11.3 to −0.5); p = 0.033
RADIOSOUND-HTN, 201994Symplicity Spyral (multi-electrode RF) vs Paradise (US)US-RDN vs RF-RDN of the main artery vs RF-RDN of main artery vs RF-RDN of the branches, and accessory arteries (1:1:1)120Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP on ≥3 antihypertensive drugsChange in daytime ambulatory SBP at 3 monthsUS: −13.2 ± 13.7 mmHg vs RF main artery: 6.5 ± 10.3 mmHg vs RF including branches: −8.3 ± 11.7 mmHg (p = 0.043 for US vs RF main artery; p > 0.99 for RF main artery vs RF branches)
First-generation randomised sham-controlled trials
Symplicity HTN-3, 201416Symplicity Flex (mono-electrode RF)RDN vs sham (2:1)535Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP on ≥3 antihypertensive drugsChange in office SBP at 6 months−14.1 ± 23.9 vs −11.7 ± 25.9 mmHg; p = 0.27
RSD-Leipzig, 201595Symplicity Flex (mono-electrode RF)RDN vs sham (1:1)71Uncontrolled 24-hr BP on ≥3 antihypertensive drugsChange in 24-hr SBP at 6 months−7.0 (95% CI: −10.8 to −3.2) vs −3.5 mmHg (95% CI: −6.7 to −0.2); p = 0.15
ReSET, 201696Symplicity Flex (mono-electrode RF)RDN vs sham (1:1)69Uncontrolled daytime ambulatory BP on ≥3 antihypertensive drugsChange in daytime ambulatory SBP at 6 months−6.1 ± 18.9 vs −4.3 ± 15.1 mmHg; p = 0.66
WAVE IV, 201797Externally delivered therapeutic US energy (surround sound system)RDN vs sham (1:1)81Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP on ≥3 antihypertensive drugsChange in office SBP−13.2 ± 20 vs −18.9 ± 14 mmHg; p = 0.181
REDUCE-HTN: REINFORCE, 202098Vessix (multi-electrode RF)RDN vs sham (2:1)51Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP in absence of antihypertensive drugsChange in 24-hr SBP at 2 months−5.3 (95% CI: −8.8 to −1.8) vs −8.5 mmHg (95% CI: −13.3 to −3.8); p = 0.30
Second-generation randomised sham-controlled trials
SPYRAL HTN-OFF MED Pilot, 20179Symplicity Spyral (multi-electrode RF)RDN vs sham (1:1)80Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP in the absence of antihypertensive drugsChange in 24-hr SBP at 3 months−5.5 (95% CI: −9.1 to −2.0) vs −0.5 mmHg (95% CI: −3.9 to 2.90); p = 0.0414
RADIANCE-HTN SOLO, 201812Paradise (US)RDN vs sham (1:1)146Uncontrolled daytime ambulatory BP in the absence of antihypertensive drugsChange in daytime ambulatory SBP at 2 months−8.5 ± 9.3 vs −2.2 ± 10.0 mmHg; p = 0.0001
SPYRAL HTN-ON MED, 201810Symplicity Spyral (multi-electrode RF)RDN vs sham (1:1)80Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP on 1 to 3 antihypertensive drugsChange in 24-hr SBP at 6 months−9.0 (95% CI: −12.7 to −5.3) vs −1.6 mmHg (95% CI: −5.2 to 2.0); p = 0.006
SPYRAL HTN-OFF MED Pivotal, 202011Symplicity Spyral (multi-electrode RF)Bayesian adaptive design, RDN vs sham (1:1)331Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP, in the absence of antihypertensive drugsChange in 24-hr SBP at 3 months−4.7 (95% CI: −6.4 to −2.9) vs −0.6 mmHg (95% CI: −2.1 to 0.9); p = 0.0005
RADIANCE-HTN TRIO, 202113Paradise (US)RDN vs sham (1:1)136Uncontrolled office and daytime ambulatory BP on 3 antihypertensive drugsChange in daytime ambulatory SBP at 2 months−8.0 (IQR −16.4, 0.0) vs −3.0 mmHg (IQR −10.3, 1.8); p = 0.022
REQUIRE, 202219Paradise (US)RDN vs sham (1:1)143Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP on ≥3 antihypertensive drugsChange in daytime ambulatory SBP at 3 months−6.6 (95% CI: −10.4 to −2.8) vs −6.5 mmHg (95% CI: −10.3 to −2.7); p = 0.971

BP: blood pressure; CI: confidence interval; IQR: interquartile ratio; RDN: renal denervation; RF: radiofrequency; SBP: systolic blood pressure; SSAHT: standardised stepped-care antihypertensive treatment; US: ultrasound

Table 1

Key characteristics of important randomised controlled RDN trials

Trial, year of publicationInvestigational deviceDesign (randomisation ratio)Sample sizeInclusion criteriaPrimary efficacy outcomeBP reduction in RDN vs control group
Randomised controlled trials
Symplicity HTN-2, 201092Symplicity Flex (mono-electrode RF)Open-label, RDN vs control (1:1)106Uncontrolled office BP on ≥3 antihypertensive drugsChange in office SBP at 6 months−32 ± 23 vs −1 ± 21 mmHg; p < 0.0001
DENERHTN, 201593Symplicity Flex (mono-electrode RF)Open-label, SSAHT + RDN vs SSAHT (1:1)106Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP on ≥3 antihypertensive drugsChange in daytime ambulatory SBP at 6 months−9.9 (95% CI: −13.6 to −6.2) vs −5.9 mmHg (95% CI: −11.3 to −0.5); p = 0.033
RADIOSOUND-HTN, 201994Symplicity Spyral (multi-electrode RF) vs Paradise (US)US-RDN vs RF-RDN of the main artery vs RF-RDN of main artery vs RF-RDN of the branches, and accessory arteries (1:1:1)120Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP on ≥3 antihypertensive drugsChange in daytime ambulatory SBP at 3 monthsUS: −13.2 ± 13.7 mmHg vs RF main artery: 6.5 ± 10.3 mmHg vs RF including branches: −8.3 ± 11.7 mmHg (p = 0.043 for US vs RF main artery; p > 0.99 for RF main artery vs RF branches)
First-generation randomised sham-controlled trials
Symplicity HTN-3, 201416Symplicity Flex (mono-electrode RF)RDN vs sham (2:1)535Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP on ≥3 antihypertensive drugsChange in office SBP at 6 months−14.1 ± 23.9 vs −11.7 ± 25.9 mmHg; p = 0.27
RSD-Leipzig, 201595Symplicity Flex (mono-electrode RF)RDN vs sham (1:1)71Uncontrolled 24-hr BP on ≥3 antihypertensive drugsChange in 24-hr SBP at 6 months−7.0 (95% CI: −10.8 to −3.2) vs −3.5 mmHg (95% CI: −6.7 to −0.2); p = 0.15
ReSET, 201696Symplicity Flex (mono-electrode RF)RDN vs sham (1:1)69Uncontrolled daytime ambulatory BP on ≥3 antihypertensive drugsChange in daytime ambulatory SBP at 6 months−6.1 ± 18.9 vs −4.3 ± 15.1 mmHg; p = 0.66
WAVE IV, 201797Externally delivered therapeutic US energy (surround sound system)RDN vs sham (1:1)81Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP on ≥3 antihypertensive drugsChange in office SBP−13.2 ± 20 vs −18.9 ± 14 mmHg; p = 0.181
REDUCE-HTN: REINFORCE, 202098Vessix (multi-electrode RF)RDN vs sham (2:1)51Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP in absence of antihypertensive drugsChange in 24-hr SBP at 2 months−5.3 (95% CI: −8.8 to −1.8) vs −8.5 mmHg (95% CI: −13.3 to −3.8); p = 0.30
Second-generation randomised sham-controlled trials
SPYRAL HTN-OFF MED Pilot, 20179Symplicity Spyral (multi-electrode RF)RDN vs sham (1:1)80Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP in the absence of antihypertensive drugsChange in 24-hr SBP at 3 months−5.5 (95% CI: −9.1 to −2.0) vs −0.5 mmHg (95% CI: −3.9 to 2.90); p = 0.0414
RADIANCE-HTN SOLO, 201812Paradise (US)RDN vs sham (1:1)146Uncontrolled daytime ambulatory BP in the absence of antihypertensive drugsChange in daytime ambulatory SBP at 2 months−8.5 ± 9.3 vs −2.2 ± 10.0 mmHg; p = 0.0001
SPYRAL HTN-ON MED, 201810Symplicity Spyral (multi-electrode RF)RDN vs sham (1:1)80Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP on 1 to 3 antihypertensive drugsChange in 24-hr SBP at 6 months−9.0 (95% CI: −12.7 to −5.3) vs −1.6 mmHg (95% CI: −5.2 to 2.0); p = 0.006
SPYRAL HTN-OFF MED Pivotal, 202011Symplicity Spyral (multi-electrode RF)Bayesian adaptive design, RDN vs sham (1:1)331Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP, in the absence of antihypertensive drugsChange in 24-hr SBP at 3 months−4.7 (95% CI: −6.4 to −2.9) vs −0.6 mmHg (95% CI: −2.1 to 0.9); p = 0.0005
RADIANCE-HTN TRIO, 202113Paradise (US)RDN vs sham (1:1)136Uncontrolled office and daytime ambulatory BP on 3 antihypertensive drugsChange in daytime ambulatory SBP at 2 months−8.0 (IQR −16.4, 0.0) vs −3.0 mmHg (IQR −10.3, 1.8); p = 0.022
REQUIRE, 202219Paradise (US)RDN vs sham (1:1)143Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP on ≥3 antihypertensive drugsChange in daytime ambulatory SBP at 3 months−6.6 (95% CI: −10.4 to −2.8) vs −6.5 mmHg (95% CI: −10.3 to −2.7); p = 0.971
Trial, year of publicationInvestigational deviceDesign (randomisation ratio)Sample sizeInclusion criteriaPrimary efficacy outcomeBP reduction in RDN vs control group
Randomised controlled trials
Symplicity HTN-2, 201092Symplicity Flex (mono-electrode RF)Open-label, RDN vs control (1:1)106Uncontrolled office BP on ≥3 antihypertensive drugsChange in office SBP at 6 months−32 ± 23 vs −1 ± 21 mmHg; p < 0.0001
DENERHTN, 201593Symplicity Flex (mono-electrode RF)Open-label, SSAHT + RDN vs SSAHT (1:1)106Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP on ≥3 antihypertensive drugsChange in daytime ambulatory SBP at 6 months−9.9 (95% CI: −13.6 to −6.2) vs −5.9 mmHg (95% CI: −11.3 to −0.5); p = 0.033
RADIOSOUND-HTN, 201994Symplicity Spyral (multi-electrode RF) vs Paradise (US)US-RDN vs RF-RDN of the main artery vs RF-RDN of main artery vs RF-RDN of the branches, and accessory arteries (1:1:1)120Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP on ≥3 antihypertensive drugsChange in daytime ambulatory SBP at 3 monthsUS: −13.2 ± 13.7 mmHg vs RF main artery: 6.5 ± 10.3 mmHg vs RF including branches: −8.3 ± 11.7 mmHg (p = 0.043 for US vs RF main artery; p > 0.99 for RF main artery vs RF branches)
First-generation randomised sham-controlled trials
Symplicity HTN-3, 201416Symplicity Flex (mono-electrode RF)RDN vs sham (2:1)535Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP on ≥3 antihypertensive drugsChange in office SBP at 6 months−14.1 ± 23.9 vs −11.7 ± 25.9 mmHg; p = 0.27
RSD-Leipzig, 201595Symplicity Flex (mono-electrode RF)RDN vs sham (1:1)71Uncontrolled 24-hr BP on ≥3 antihypertensive drugsChange in 24-hr SBP at 6 months−7.0 (95% CI: −10.8 to −3.2) vs −3.5 mmHg (95% CI: −6.7 to −0.2); p = 0.15
ReSET, 201696Symplicity Flex (mono-electrode RF)RDN vs sham (1:1)69Uncontrolled daytime ambulatory BP on ≥3 antihypertensive drugsChange in daytime ambulatory SBP at 6 months−6.1 ± 18.9 vs −4.3 ± 15.1 mmHg; p = 0.66
WAVE IV, 201797Externally delivered therapeutic US energy (surround sound system)RDN vs sham (1:1)81Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP on ≥3 antihypertensive drugsChange in office SBP−13.2 ± 20 vs −18.9 ± 14 mmHg; p = 0.181
REDUCE-HTN: REINFORCE, 202098Vessix (multi-electrode RF)RDN vs sham (2:1)51Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP in absence of antihypertensive drugsChange in 24-hr SBP at 2 months−5.3 (95% CI: −8.8 to −1.8) vs −8.5 mmHg (95% CI: −13.3 to −3.8); p = 0.30
Second-generation randomised sham-controlled trials
SPYRAL HTN-OFF MED Pilot, 20179Symplicity Spyral (multi-electrode RF)RDN vs sham (1:1)80Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP in the absence of antihypertensive drugsChange in 24-hr SBP at 3 months−5.5 (95% CI: −9.1 to −2.0) vs −0.5 mmHg (95% CI: −3.9 to 2.90); p = 0.0414
RADIANCE-HTN SOLO, 201812Paradise (US)RDN vs sham (1:1)146Uncontrolled daytime ambulatory BP in the absence of antihypertensive drugsChange in daytime ambulatory SBP at 2 months−8.5 ± 9.3 vs −2.2 ± 10.0 mmHg; p = 0.0001
SPYRAL HTN-ON MED, 201810Symplicity Spyral (multi-electrode RF)RDN vs sham (1:1)80Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP on 1 to 3 antihypertensive drugsChange in 24-hr SBP at 6 months−9.0 (95% CI: −12.7 to −5.3) vs −1.6 mmHg (95% CI: −5.2 to 2.0); p = 0.006
SPYRAL HTN-OFF MED Pivotal, 202011Symplicity Spyral (multi-electrode RF)Bayesian adaptive design, RDN vs sham (1:1)331Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP, in the absence of antihypertensive drugsChange in 24-hr SBP at 3 months−4.7 (95% CI: −6.4 to −2.9) vs −0.6 mmHg (95% CI: −2.1 to 0.9); p = 0.0005
RADIANCE-HTN TRIO, 202113Paradise (US)RDN vs sham (1:1)136Uncontrolled office and daytime ambulatory BP on 3 antihypertensive drugsChange in daytime ambulatory SBP at 2 months−8.0 (IQR −16.4, 0.0) vs −3.0 mmHg (IQR −10.3, 1.8); p = 0.022
REQUIRE, 202219Paradise (US)RDN vs sham (1:1)143Uncontrolled office and 24-hr BP on ≥3 antihypertensive drugsChange in daytime ambulatory SBP at 3 months−6.6 (95% CI: −10.4 to −2.8) vs −6.5 mmHg (95% CI: −10.3 to −2.7); p = 0.971

BP: blood pressure; CI: confidence interval; IQR: interquartile ratio; RDN: renal denervation; RF: radiofrequency; SBP: systolic blood pressure; SSAHT: standardised stepped-care antihypertensive treatment; US: ultrasound

Close
This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

Close

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

View Article Abstract & Purchase Options

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Close