eLetters

59 e-Letters

  • Abstract final statement is potentially misleading
    Amit K Mistri

    Dear Author & Editor

    I appreciate that case reports are extremely important in establishing the potential viability of interventions. However, it is an overstatement to conclude that a single case report demonstrates the "safety" of the given approach.

    What the case report does indicate is that the technique is feasible and that it can be performed safely in this one case and agreeably merits fur...

    Show More
  • Spinal Cord angiography and Rene Djindjian
    Eric J Russell

    I write to congratulate the authors on a fine basic review of spinal cord vasculature and related imaging modalities, but also to point out that as time goes by, the older literature may fall by the wayside, largely forgotten. Ordinarily I try not to act like a dinosaur and point such things out, but the authors do mention (on page 69) in reviewing the vascular supply of the cervical spinal cord, that "according to "Dji...

    Show More
  • RE:
    Cameron McDougall

    We thank Coutinho and colleagues for their comments on our manuscript. They state that the 4% mortality associated with noninvasive anticoagulant treatment in the International Study on Cerebral Vein and Dural Sinus Thrombosis (ISCVT) is superior to our observed mortality rate of 15% (2 of 13 patients). The ISCVT is a large prospective trial, which is detailed in the Discussion of our article. A direct comparison of m...

    Show More
  • Mechanical thrombectomy cannot be considered as first-line treatment for cerebral venous thrombosis
    Jonathan M Coutinho

    To the Editor:

    The paper by Dashti et al. (1) describes 13 patients who received mechanical thrombectomy with the AngioJet device as first line treatment for cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT). Mechanical thrombectomy is a promising alternative to endovascular thrombolysis with thrombolytic drugs. Hemorrhagic infarcts are common among CVT patients and it is plausible - although unproven - that mechanical thrombec...

    Show More
  • Authors' Response
    Charles Kerber

    As the first author (and the senior author) I am wholly responsible for any errors in the paper, including errors of attribution. I apologize first to our readers, and second to Dr. Altes, whose contributions are significant and are of continuing value.

    Charles Kerber M.D.

    Conflict of Interest:

    None declared

  • A model is not just any model
    David F. Kallmes

    Dear Editor,

    I read with interest the paper by Kerber, et al. entitled "1-Hexyl n- cyanoacrylate compound (Neucrylate_AN), a new berry aneurysm treatment. II. Rabbit implant studies: technique and histology." (1) As suggested by the title, the paper focuses on the preclinical evaluation of a new device in a rabbit model. However, the references and discussion are misleading and may well confuse researchers inten...

    Show More
  • Authors' Response
    David F. Kallmes

    We greatly appreciate the input by Dr. Chandra and colleagues. Our paper was a highly focused, empiric exercise to determine, based on morphology alone, the potential for endoluminal implants for treatment of aneurysms. There are myriad additional factors that, without question, will affect the appropriateness of such devices for a given aneurysm, including aneurysm rupture status, patient condition, age, tolerance of...

    Show More
  • Pipeline, aneurysms and the FDA
    Joshua A. Hirsch

    Pipeline, aneurysms and the FDA

    Response to "Estimating the proportion of intracranial aneurysms likely to be amenable to treatment with the pipeline embolization device." J Neurointerv Surg. 2011 Dec 2. [Epub ahead of print]

    Ronil V. Chandra MBBS FRANZCR, Thabele M Leslie-Mazwi M.D and Joshua A Hirsch M.D

    Department of Interventional Neuroradiology/ Endovascular Neurosurgery Massachusetts Gen...

    Show More
  • Response to Ready or not! Here comes ICD-10
    Joshua A. Hirsch

    In October 2011, JNIS published our article on the implementation of the ICD-10 codes1. The final line of the paper was..." The authors favor postponing implementation of ICD-10 and prefer a focus on core issues of improving care and access. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services will require all health professionals and facilities to transition to ICD-10 by October 2013. ICD- 10 is viewed as being more nuanced...

    Show More

Pages