Regarding "aneurysm rupture following treatment with flow-diverting stents: Computational hemodynamics analysis of treatment"

31Citations
Citations of this article
21Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.

Abstract

The conclusions presented by Cebral et al1 are based upon results that are not only largely inconsistent with both existing experimental data and basic fluid mechanics but are selectively applied to achieve a consistent conclusion for a group of aneurysms with a known outcome (postprocedural rupture). It is important to recognize that the results or conclusions presented in the manuscript have not been validated by either dynamic angiographic data or direct physiologic measurements. These results are solely the product of mathematic simulations that are only as valid as the assumptions on which they are based. As such, we would urge the readership to exercise extreme caution before incorporating any of the concepts proposed by Cebral et al, into clinical decision-making (eg, in the selection of patients to be treated with flow-diverting devices) or into the design of clinical research studies. Copyright © 2011 by the American Society of Neuroradiology.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Fiorella, D., Sadasivan, C., Woo, H. H., & Lieber, B. (2011). Regarding “aneurysm rupture following treatment with flow-diverting stents: Computational hemodynamics analysis of treatment.” American Journal of Neuroradiology, 32(5). https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A2534

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free