2021
DOI: 10.1080/02656736.2021.1963849
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Comparison of ablation characteristics of three different radiofrequency applicators in renal sympathetic denervation

Abstract: Objective: Renal sympathetic denervation (RDN) is an alternative treatment for resistant hypertension (RH). This study aims to compare ablation effects using three radiofrequency applicators (i.e., balloonbased four electrodes, spiral and monopolar devices). Methods: An idealized three-dimensional model of the renal artery was established using COMSOL Multiphysics to mimic radiofrequency ablation (RFA). Radiofrequency (RF) energy was delivered to the tissue at the same simulation settings, i.e., 4, 6, and 8 W … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2

Citation Types

0
2
0

Year Published

2022
2022
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3

Relationship

0
3

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 3 publications
(2 citation statements)
references
References 37 publications
(52 reference statements)
0
2
0
Order By: Relevance
“…[34] However, this finding was not found in other studies. [31] In the present study, the subgroup analysis of different RDN approaches was not performed because of the incomplete data. Therefore, future randomized controlled trials are needed to resolve this issue.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…[34] However, this finding was not found in other studies. [31] In the present study, the subgroup analysis of different RDN approaches was not performed because of the incomplete data. Therefore, future randomized controlled trials are needed to resolve this issue.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…[30] Furthermore, the ultrasound catheter ablation enables full circumferential ablations. Fengler, et al [31] demonstrated that the Paradise ultrasound ablation catheter had a superior BP lowering effect than the Spyral radiofrequency ablation catheter (differences: -6.7 mmHg, P = 0.038). In this meta-analysis, the comparison of radiofrequency and ultrasound catheters was unable to conduct because of the inco-mplete data.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%