Renal Denervation
ProcedureRenal denervation in patients with HFpEF and uncontrolled hypertension
NCT Number: NCT05030987
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction has a high mortality, which is contrasted by a total absence of therapy options besides symptomatic diuretic treatment. This study aims to explore the potential of renal denervation as a treatment option for heart failure with preserved ejection fraction.
Interested in participating?
Request Info18 year–80 year
All sexes
Interventional
Not applicable
Universitätsklinikum Halle (Saale), Klinik und Poliklinik für Innere Medizin III, Halle, Saxony-Anhalt, Germany
Heart failure is one of the most important diseases worldwide, with a 5-year mortality of up to 75% in symptomatic patients. While substantial progress has been made in the treatment of patients with reduced left ventricular ejection fraction (HFrEF), mortality for patients with heart failure and preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) remains unchanged, despite a comparable prevalence and mortality of the disease as for heart failure with reduced ejection fraction.
HFpEF is a heterogeneous condition and has been a diagnostic and therapeutic challenge for clinicians and researchers over the past decades. While some rare cases of HFpEF can be attributed to specific diseases like amyloidosis, in most other patients common characteristics are increased ventricular filling pressures and ventricular and arterial stiffening as frequently caused by ageing, diabetes and arterial hypertension. Furthermore, increased sympathetic activity has been described as one pathogenic contributor to chronic heart failure and is associated with poor clinical prognosis. It also leads to a more pulsatile BP profile which can cause a mismatch in arterio-ventricular coupling.
The modulating effects on the sympathetic nervous system induced by renal denervation (RDN) should be beneficial in HFpEF, as they improve resting and exercise hemodynamics due to an improved ventriculoarterial coupling by reduced aortic stiffness and lower systemic blood pressure. In addition, RDN leads to optimized stroke volume and stroke work and might affect cardiac preload by improving blood distribution into the splanchnic compartment.
This study aims to explore the potential of RDN as a therapy for HFpEF in a single center pilot trial using a randomized, sham-controlled double-blind design.
Healthy volunteers accepted: No
Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.
Inclusion criteria
Exclusion criteria
Renal denervation in patients with HFpEF and uncontrolled hypertension
Sham Treatment. After six months, cross-over is planned in all sham-treated patients and this patients will also receive a renal denervation.
Other names: Sham Procedure
Time frame: 6 months after randomization
To assess the hemodynamic effects of RDN in patients with HFpEF in comparison to sham-treatment
Time frame: 6, 12 and 24 months after RDN
number of combined endpoint in RDN and SHAM patients
Time frame: 6 months after randomization
difference between RDN and sham
Time frame: 6, 12 and 24 months after RDN
Change in mean PA pressure, ePAD and PA pressure variability from pulmonary pressure sensor measurements, compared to baseline values
Time frame: 6 months after randomization
difference between RDN and sham
Time frame: 6, 12 and 24 months after RDN
Change in Systolic/Diastolic 24h blood pressure by ABPM and blood pressure variability, compared to baseline values
Time frame: 6 months after randomization
Difference in ventriculo-arterial coupling (by end-systolic elastance and arterial elastance) as acquired by invasive measurement
Time frame: 6 months after randomization
Change in CMR-based hemodynamics (difference between RDN and sham) as compared to baseline values
Time frame: 6 months after randomization
Change in ventriculo-arterial coupling (cMRI and echocardiogram) (difference between RDN and sham) as compared to baseline values
Time frame: 6 months after randomization
Difference in resting and exercise PCWP (at 20, 40, 60, 80 W, and maximum workload) (difference between RDN and sham) as compared to baseline values
Time frame: 6 months after randomization
Difference in peak PCWP (difference between RDN and sham) as compared to baseline values
Time frame: 6 months after randomization
Difference in NT-proBNP (difference between RDN and sham) as compared to baseline
Time frame: 6, 12 and 24 months after RDN
Difference in NT-proBNP as compared to baseline
Time frame: 6 months after randomization
number of patients with Hospitalizations for heart failure (difference between RDN and sham)
Time frame: 6 months after randomization
All-cause Mortality (difference between RDN and sham)
Time frame: 6 months after randomization
cardiac mortality (difference between RDN and sham)
Time frame: 6 months after randomization
major adverse cardiovascular events (composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, stroke and hospitalization for heart failure) (difference between RDN and sham)
Time frame: 6 months after randomization
Adverse events (difference between RDN and sham)
Time frame: 6 months after randomization
Frequency of patients with controlled hypertension (blood pressure within treatment goals in ABPM as recommended by the European Society of Cardiology) (difference between RDN and sham)
Time frame: 6, 12 and 24 months after RDN
Frequency of patients with controlled hypertension (blood pressure within treatment goals in ABPM as recommended by the European Society of Cardiology) as compared to baseline
Time frame: 6 months after randomization
Difference in 6-minute walk distance (difference between RDN and sham)
Time frame: 6, 12 and 24 months after RDN
Difference in 6-minute walk distance as compared to baseline
Time frame: 6 months after randomization
Change in exercise BP between baseline and 6 months and maximum exercise capacity between baseline and 6 months (difference between RDN and sham)
Time frame: 6 months after randomization
Change in Minnesota living with heart failure questionnaire (difference between RDN and sham)
Time frame: 6, 12 and 24 months after RDN
Change in Minnesota living with heart failure questionnaire, compared to baseline
Contact information is provided by the study sponsor or research team.
University of Leipzig
Other
Renal Denervation to Treat Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction - A Pilot Trial
Acronym: UNLOAD-HFpEF
OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.
View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.
Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.
NCT07214376
Cardiovascular Diseases, Heart Diseases
Houma, Louisiana, United States
View Trial DetailsNCT05824923
Cardiovascular Diseases, Heart Diseases
Shenyang, Liaoning, China
View Trial DetailsNCT05839028
Cardiovascular Diseases, Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction
Tyumen, Tyumen Oblast, Russia
View Trial DetailsNCT04434664
Cardiovascular Diseases, Heart Failure With Preserved Ejection Fraction
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, United States
View Trial Details