Abstract 4358422: Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Renal Denervation Versus Spinal Cord Stimulation in Hypertensive Patients: A Propensity-Matched Cohort Study

Introduction: Hypertension remains a leading contributor to cardiovascular morbidity and mortality despite advances in pharmacotherapy and device-based interventions. Renal denervation (RDV) and spinal cord stimulation (SCS) have emerged as alternative therapies targeting neurohormonal pathways to achieve blood pressure control. Yet direct comparisons of their efficacy and safety in real-world populations are lacking. We aimed to compare outcomes following RDV versus SCS in hypertensive adults using a large propensity-matched cohort. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study through the TriNetX Global Collaborative Network, identifying adults (≥18 years) with hypertension who underwent first-ever RDV or SCS between January 2019 and October 2024. Outcomes assessed at 4-, 12-, and 26-weeks post-procedure included blood pressure targets (SBP ≤130/≤140 mm Hg; DBP ≤80/≤90 mm Hg), acute kidney injury (AKI), major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), electrolyte disturbances (hyper-/hypokalemia, hyper-/hyponatremia), serious adverse events, procedure-related complications, and all-cause mortality. Baseline characteristics were balanced by 1:1 propensity-score matching demographics, comorbidities, and antihypertensive medications. Results: After matching (n=307 per group; 49.8 % male), SCS achieved superior blood pressure control by 12 and 26 weeks: at 12 wk DBP ≤80 mm Hg (RR 0.79; P=0.002) and combined SBP/DBP targets (RR 0.86; P<0.001), and at 26 wk SBP ≤130 mm Hg (RR 0.85; P=0.044), SBP ≤140 mm Hg (RR 0.82; P=0.004), DBP ≤80 mm Hg (RR 0.84; P=0.019), and DBP ≤90 mm Hg (RR 0.84; P=0.011). RDV was associated with higher risks of hypokalemia (4 wk RR 4.10; P<0.001; 26 wk RR 2.70; P<0.001), serious adverse events (4 wk RR 2.12; P=0.001; 26 wk RR 1.46; P=0.005), hyponatremia (4 wk RR 4.20; P<0.001; 26 wk RR 2.61; P<0.001), MACE (26 wk RR 3.50; P<0.001), and all-cause mortality (26 wk RR 2.40; P=0.013). Conclusion: In this large real-world cohort, SCS provided more sustained blood pressure reduction with fewer serious complications compared to RDV. These findings support consideration of SCS as a preferable neurostimulation strategy for patients with resistant hypertension.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Circulation
Published
2025-11-03
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1161/circ.152.suppl_3.4358422
Primary Topic
Heart rate and cardiovascular health
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Abstract 4358422: Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Renal Denervation Versus Spinal Cord Stimulation in Hypertensive Patients: A Propensity-Matched Cohort Study

Maria Vargas, Abdalhakim R. M. Shubietah, Muath Baniowda, Mohamed Murad et al.
Circulation
Heart rate and cardiovascular health
article

Abstract 4358422: Comparative Efficacy and Safety of Renal Denervation Versus Spinal Cord Stimulation in Hypertensive Patients: A Propensity-Matched Cohort Study

Maria Vargas, Abdalhakim R. M. Shubietah, Muath Baniowda, Mohamed Murad, Mohammad Alqadi, Suleiman Khreshi, Abdalrahman Assaassa, Qutaiba Qafisheh, Jehad Zeidalkilani, Ahmed Emara, Mohamed S. Elgendy, Mohamed Saad Rakab, Mohammad Abed Alhaleem
article en

Abstract

Introduction: Hypertension remains a leading contributor to cardiovascular morbidity and mortality despite advances in pharmacotherapy and device-based interventions. Renal denervation (RDV) and spinal cord stimulation (SCS) have emerged as alternative therapies targeting neurohormonal pathways to achieve blood pressure control. Yet direct comparisons of their efficacy and safety in real-world populations are lacking. We aimed to compare outcomes following RDV versus SCS in hypertensive adults using a large propensity-matched cohort. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study through the TriNetX Global Collaborative Network, identifying adults (≥18 years) with hypertension who underwent first-ever RDV or SCS between January 2019 and October 2024. Outcomes assessed at 4-, 12-, and 26-weeks post-procedure included blood pressure targets (SBP ≤130/≤140 mm Hg; DBP ≤80/≤90 mm Hg), acute kidney injury (AKI), major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), electrolyte disturbances (hyper-/hypokalemia, hyper-/hyponatremia), serious adverse events, procedure-related complications, and all-cause mortality. Baseline characteristics were balanced by 1:1 propensity-score matching demographics, comorbidities, and antihypertensive medications. Results: After matching (n=307 per group; 49.8 % male), SCS achieved superior blood pressure control by 12 and 26 weeks: at 12 wk DBP ≤80 mm Hg (RR 0.79; P=0.002) and combined SBP/DBP targets (RR 0.86; P<0.001), and at 26 wk SBP ≤130 mm Hg (RR 0.85; P=0.044), SBP ≤140 mm Hg (RR 0.82; P=0.004), DBP ≤80 mm Hg (RR 0.84; P=0.019), and DBP ≤90 mm Hg (RR 0.84; P=0.011). RDV was associated with higher risks of hypokalemia (4 wk RR 4.10; P<0.001; 26 wk RR 2.70; P<0.001), serious adverse events (4 wk RR 2.12; P=0.001; 26 wk RR 1.46; P=0.005), hyponatremia (4 wk RR 4.20; P<0.001; 26 wk RR 2.61; P<0.001), MACE (26 wk RR 3.50; P<0.001), and all-cause mortality (26 wk RR 2.40; P=0.013). Conclusion: In this large real-world cohort, SCS provided more sustained blood pressure reduction with fewer serious complications compared to RDV. These findings support consideration of SCS as a preferable neurostimulation strategy for patients with resistant hypertension.

CirculationVol. 152(Suppl_3)
Mansoura University (EG), Al-Azhar University (EG), Tanta University (EG), Thomas Jefferson University Hospital (US), Advocate Illinois Masonic Medical Center (US), St. Mary Medical Center (US), University of Michigan–Dearborn (US), Beaumont Hospital, Dearborn (US), Mercy Medical Center Sioux City (US), University of Missouri–Kansas City (US), University of Toledo (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 50%
Heart rate and cardiovascular health
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.