Article Text

Download PDFPDF

Letters to the Editor
Authors' response to Derdeyn CP, Aguilar, et al.
  1. Marta Aguilar Pérez1,
  2. Elina Miloslavski1,
  3. Sebastian Fischer1,
  4. Hansjörg Bäzner2,
  5. Hans Henkes1,3
  1. 1Klinik für Neuroradiologie, Neurozentrum, Klinikum Stuttgart, Germany
  2. 2Klinik für Neurologie, Neurozentrum, Klinikum Stuttgart, Germany
  3. 3Medizinische Fakultät der Universitdt Duisburg-Essen, Germany
  1. Correspondence to Professor Hans Henkes, Klinik für Neuroradiologie, Klinikum Stuttgart, Kriegsbergstrasse 60, Stuttgart D-70174, Germany; hhhenkes{at}

Statistics from

We reported the first successful use of a Solitaire stent for mechanical thrombectomy as a treatment for acute ischemic stroke.1 Nothing else!

The suspicious judgment of priority claims2 has a long history in radiology (eg, Wilhelm Röntgen never filed a patent for his discovery of x-rays). However, the senior author of the paper under discussion claimed intellectual property for a device suitable for mechanical thrombectomy with a priority date of 23 August 2004.3 Primacy has obviously gained some acceptance during the last 110 years.

The incriminated paper does not make a claim; it just reports a fact from recent history: the first successful use of a Solitaire stent for mechanical thrombectomy in ischemic stroke. The only possible falsification of this report would be an earlier clinical stroke treatment with the same device and usage, or at least with another self-expanding stent used for mechanical thrombectomy.

The case report of Kelly et al4 is irrelevant in this context. What they and others5 describe is the use of a partially deployed stent in combination with Abciximab as a temporary bypass. This technique has some potential benefits and was recently brought up again by MindFrame Inc (Irvine, CA, USA), but it is just not the same as a thrombectomy. Those who believe in economic success might come to the conclusion that thrombectomy is superior to temporary bypassing for the recanalization of acutely occluded cerebral arteries.

The excitement induced by the use of the Enterprise stent as a temporary bypass might have been a local and ephemeral phenomenon; however, it did not cause too much commotion, at least in Europe.


View Abstract


  • Linked article 010242.

  • Competing interests None.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Linked Articles