Skip to content

Full Length Versus Proximal Renal Arteries Ablation

The Clinical Efficacy Comparison of Two Renal Sympathetic Denervation Strategies ---- Full Length Versus Proximal Renal Arteries Ablation

Status
Completed
Phases
NA
Study type
Interventional
Source
ClinicalTrials.gov
Registry ID
NCT01848275
Enrollment
47
Registered
2013-05-07
Start date
2011-03-31
Completion date
2015-06-30
Last updated
2017-07-17

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Hypertension, Resistant to Conventional Therapy

Brief summary

Catheter-based renal sympathetic modification has been documented to be effective option for blood pressure control in patients with resistant hypertension, but the safety is still concerned around worldwide. Based on anatomic findings, blocking renal sympathetic nerves at proximity may be enough for successful renal sympathetic modifications. This study was designed to compare the efficacy and safety of full length versus proximal ablation of bilateral renal arteries.

Detailed description

After baseline assessment was completed, patients with resistant hypertension were enrolled, and randomly divided into two groups. This study is going to recruit 40 patients (group 1 VS group 2 = 1:1) with a follow-up duration of one year. Group 1 received ablation from distal to ostial of bilateral renal arteries, group 2 received ablation at proximal of bilateral renal arteries. RDN was performed with saline irrigated catheter. Office and ambulatory blood pressure was measured.

Interventions

DEVICEThermocool®Rcatheter

The full length RDN was performed discretely from distal to proximal by point to point using Thermocool®Rcatheter

Sponsors

The Second Affiliated Hospital of Chongqing Medical University
Lead SponsorOTHER

Study design

Allocation
RANDOMIZED
Intervention model
PARALLEL
Primary purpose
TREATMENT
Masking
NONE

Eligibility

Sex/Gender
ALL
Age
18 Years to 75 Years
Healthy volunteers
No

Inclusion criteria

* office systolic blood pressure of 160 mm Hg or more, * patients had to be on a stable drug regimen of at least 3 antihypertensive medications with no changes for 1 month before enrollment. * Despite being treated with at least three antihypertensive drugs(including one diuretic), or confirmed intolerance to medications; * ≥ 18 years old,; * did not have any known secondary cause of hypertension; * had a glomerular filtration rate estimated with the modification of diet in renal disease formula, of 45 ml/min/1.73m2 or more.

Exclusion criteria

* patients with type 1 diabetes, * implanted pacemakers or implantable cardioverter defibrillators; * pregnant women; * haemodynamically significant valvular disease; * patients with renovascular abnormalities(including mild to severe renal artery stenosis, especially caused by atherosclerosis, previous renal stenting or angioplasty, or known dual renal arteries, or diameter of renal artery identified by angiography less than 4 mm and/or length of renal artery less than 2 cm)

Design outcomes

Primary

MeasureTime frameDescription
Blood pressureone yearoffice BP and Ambulatory blood pressure

Secondary

MeasureTime frameDescription
ablation-related complicationsone yearablation-related complications such as pseudoaneurysm,renal artery injury

Countries

China

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ClinicalTrials.gov · Data processed: Feb 4, 2026