Skip to main content
Log in

Aren’t we missing something? Commentary on “Recurrent reversible in-stent-stenosis after flow diverter treatment” by Garner et al.

  • Letter to the Editor
  • Published:
Neuroradiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

References

  1. Garner M et al (2023) Recurrent reversible in-stent-stenosis after flow diverter treatment. Neuroradiology 65(7):1173–1177. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00234-023-03144-7

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  2. Mühl-Benninghaus R, Haußmann A, Simgen A, Tomori T, Reith W, Yilmaz U (2019) Transient in-stent stenosis: a common finding after flow diverter implantation. J NeuroIntervent Surg 11(2):196–199. https://doi.org/10.1136/neurintsurg-2018-013975

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Ayers-Ringler J et al (2022) L-arginine reduces downstream vascular contractility after flow-diverting device deployment: a preliminary study in a rabbit model. Interv Neuroradiol 28(2):183–189. https://doi.org/10.1177/15910199211025107

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Schob S et al (2019) Delayed stroke after aneurysm treatment with flow diverters in small cerebral vessels: a potentially critical complication caused by subacute vasospasm. J Clin Med 8(10):1649. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm8101649

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  5. Edelman ER, Rogers C (1998) Pathobiologic responses to stenting. Am J Cardiol 81(7A):4E–6E. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0002-9149(98)00189-1

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

This research received no specific grant from any funding agency in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to S. Sirakov.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors have no personal, financial, or institutional interest in any of the drugs, materials, or devices described in this article.

Ethics approval and consent to participate

This article does not involve any human participants; therefore, approval of the ethic committee is not necessary.

Consent to participate

Not needed.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Sirakov, A., Vladev, G., Sirakova, K. et al. Aren’t we missing something? Commentary on “Recurrent reversible in-stent-stenosis after flow diverter treatment” by Garner et al.. Neuroradiology 65, 1313–1314 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00234-023-03202-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00234-023-03202-0

Navigation