↓ Skip to main content

The effect of renal denervation in an experimental model of chronic renal insufficiency, The REmnant kidney Denervation In Pigs study (REDIP study)

Overview of attention for article published in Journal of Translational Medicine, October 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter

Citations

dimensions_citation
6 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
9 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
The effect of renal denervation in an experimental model of chronic renal insufficiency, The REmnant kidney Denervation In Pigs study (REDIP study)
Published in
Journal of Translational Medicine, October 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12967-017-1319-0
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jean-Claude Lubanda, Miroslav Chochola, Mikuláš Mlček, Petr Neužil, Josef Marek, Štěpán Havránek, Sylvie Kuchynková, Zdeňka Fingrová, Kao-Hsuan Aimee Huang, Aleš Linhart

Abstract

Renal denervation (RDN) is a promising therapeutic method in cardiology. Its currently most investigated indication is resistant hypertension. Other potential indications are atrial fibrillation, type 2 diabetes mellitus and chronic renal insufficiency among others. Previous trials showed conflicting but promising results, but the real benefits of RDN are still under investigation. Patients with renal insufficiency and resistant hypertension are proposed to be a good target for this therapy due to excessive activation of renal sympathetic drive. However, only limited number of studies showed benefits for these patients. We hypothesize that in our experimental model of chronic kidney disease (CKD) due to ischemia with increased activity of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system (RAAS), renal denervation can have protective effects by slowing or blocking the progression of renal injury. An experimental biomodel of chronic renal insufficiency induced by ischemia was developed using selective renal artery embolization (remnant kidney porcine model). 27 biomodels were assessed. Renal denervation was performed in 19 biomodels (denervated group), and the remaining were used as controls (n = 8). The extent of renal injury and reparative process between the two groups were compared and assessed using biochemical parameters and histological findings. Viable remnant kidney biomodels were achieved and maintained in 27 swine. There were no significant differences in biochemical parameters between the two groups at baseline. Histological assessment proved successful RDN procedure in all biomodels in the denervated group. Over the 7-week period, there were significant increases in serum urea, creatinine, and aldosterone concentration in both groups. The difference in urea and creatinine levels were not statistically significant between the two groups. However, the level of aldosterone in the denervated was significantly lower in comparison to the controls. Histological assessment of renal arteries showed that RDN tends to produce more damage to the arterial wall in comparison to vessels in subjects that only underwent RAE. In addition, the morphological damage of kidneys, which was expressed as a ratio of damaged surface (or scar) to the overall surface of kidney, also did not show significant difference between groups. In this study, we were not able to show significant protective effect of RDN alone on ischemic renal parenchymal damage by either laboratory or histological assessments. However, the change in aldosterone level shows some effect of renal denervation on the RAAS system. We hypothesize that a combined blockade of the RAAS and the sympathetic system could provide more protective effects against acute ischemia. This has to be further investigated in future studies.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 9 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 9 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 2 22%
Other 1 11%
Student > Master 1 11%
Researcher 1 11%
Student > Postgraduate 1 11%
Other 0 0%
Unknown 3 33%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 5 56%
Neuroscience 1 11%
Unknown 3 33%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 October 2017.
All research outputs
#7,531,725
of 12,050,803 outputs
Outputs from Journal of Translational Medicine
#1,460
of 2,335 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#160,416
of 284,727 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Journal of Translational Medicine
#42
of 58 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 12,050,803 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 2,335 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 7.3. This one is in the 8th percentile – i.e., 8% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 284,727 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 58 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 1st percentile – i.e., 1% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.