You are here

  • Home
  • Online First
  • Response to: Correspondence on "Cerebral aneurysms: Germany-wide real-world outcome data of endovascular or neurosurgical treatment from 2007 to 2019” by Cole

Article Text

Article menu

This article has a Reply. Please see:

Download PDFPDF
Letter
Response to: Correspondence on "Cerebral aneurysms: Germany-wide real-world outcome data of endovascular or neurosurgical treatment from 2007 to 2019” by Cole
  1. Klaus Kaier1,
  2. Christian Haverkamp2,
  3. Stephan Meckel3,4
  1. 1Institute of Medical Biometry and Statistics, Department of Methods in Clinical Epidemiology, Faculty of Medicine and Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
  2. 2Institute of Digitalization in Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
  3. 3Neuroradiology, Faculty of Medicine and Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Freiburg, Germany
  4. 4Institute of Diagnostic and Interventional Neuroradiology, RKH Hospital Ludwigsburg, Ludwigsburg, Germany
  1. Correspondence to Dr Christian Haverkamp, Institute of Digitalization in Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Medical Center, University of Freiburg, Freiburg 79110, Germany; christian.haverkamp{at}uniklinik-freiburg.de

http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/jnis-2023-020927

Statistics from Altmetric.com

    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.

    We thank the authors for commenting on our recent study.1

    First, the authors point out and nicely describe a major limitation of our study2, stating: “In this study, missing information includes aneurysm location, aneurysm size, why a treatment was chosen, whether a pathology was a comorbidity or a complication, if there was an external ventricular drain, and all the details regarding the aneurysmal disease process. In short, we do not know if these cohorts are comparable.”

    We fully agree with this major limitation of our study. When conducting the study we were aware of this limitation and included two paragraphs describing details of it in the Limitations section at the end of the discussion. Furthermore, we decided against sophisticated matching or weighting methods but showed unadjusted ORs as well as ORs that were adjusted for age, sex, the Charlson index and year of treatment only. Throughout the article we described both …

    View Full Text

    Footnotes

    • Contributors The authors have written the letter together according to their main focuses.

    • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

    • Competing interests SM received grants from the federal Ministry of Education and Research, consulting fees from Acandis and Novartis, honoraria for lectures from Medtronic and Stryker and support for travel from Balt. No other disclosures were reported.

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

    Linked Articles