Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jan 31, 2026

Improved Home Blood Pressure Control by CT-guided Ozone-mediated Renal Denervation for Patients with Resistant Hypertension
Published on: June 6, 2025
A Three-Arm Randomized Trial of Different Renal Denervation Devices and Techniques in Patients With Resistant
Karl Fengler1, Karl-Philipp Rommel1, Stephan Blazek1
1Department of Cardiology, Heart Center Leipzig at University of Leipzig, Germany (K.F., K.-P.R., S.B., C.B., P.H., M.v.R., S.W., S.D., H.T., P.L.).
Background:
Both radiofrequency and ultrasound endovascular renal sympathetic denervation (RDN) have proven clinical efficacy for the treatment of hypertension. We performed a head-to-head comparison of these technologies.
Methods:
Patients with resistant hypertension were randomly assigned in a 1:1:1 manner to receive either treatment with (1) radiofrequency RDN of the main renal arteries; (2) radiofrequency RDN of the main renal arteries, side branches, and accessories; or (3) an endovascular ultrasound-based RDN of the main renal artery. The primary end point was change in systolic daytime ambulatory blood pressure at 3 months.
Results:
Between June 2015 and June 2018, 120 patients were enrolled (mean age, 64±9 years±SD; mean daytime blood pressure, 153/86±12/13 mm Hg). Of these, 39 were randomly assigned to radiofrequency main renal artery ablation, 39 to combined radiofrequency ablation of the main artery and branches, and 42 to ultrasound-based treatment. Baseline daytime blood pressure, clinical characteristics, and treatment were well balanced between the groups. At 3 months, systolic daytime ambulatory blood pressure decreased by 9.5±12.3 mm Hg ( P<0.001) in the whole cohort. Although blood pressure was significantly more reduced in the ultrasound ablation group than in the radiofrequency ablation group of the main renal artery (-13.2±13.7 versus -6.5±10.3 mm Hg; mean difference, -6.7 mm Hg; global P=0.038 by ANOVA, adjusted P=0.043), no significant difference was found between the radiofrequency ablation groups (-8.3±11.7 mm Hg for additional side branch ablation; mean difference, -1.8 mm Hg; adjusted P>0.99). Similarly, the blood pressure reduction was not found to be significantly different between the ultrasound and the side branch ablation groups. Frequencies of blood pressure response ≥5 mm Hg were not significantly different (global P=0.77).
Conclusions:
In patients with resistant hypertension, endovascular ultrasound-based RDN was found to be superior to radiofrequency ablation of the main renal arteries only, whereas a combined approach of radiofrequency ablation of the main arteries, accessories, and side branches was not.
Clinical Trial Registration:
URL: https://www.clinicaltrials.gov . Unique identifier: NCT02920034.
Related Concept Videos
Muscles that Move the Arm
The pectoralis major has two origins. Its clavicular head originates on the medial half of the clavicle. In contrast, the sternocostal head originates on the costal cartilages of ribs 1-6, the sternum, and the aponeurosis of the external oblique of the...
Clinical Trials: Overview
Trial and Error and Algorithm
Clinical Trials
There are four phases in a clinical trial. A phase one...
Random Error
Random Variables
Uppercase letters such as X or Y denote a random variable. Lowercase letters like x or y denote the value of a random variable. If X is a random variable, then X is written in words, and x is given as a number.
For example, let X = the...

