Skip to main content
Advertisement

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Publication Preview--Ahead of Print
    • Past Issue Archive
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
    • COVID-19 Content and Resources
  • For Authors
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editors
    • American Society of Neuroradiology
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Podcasts
    • Subscribe on iTunes
    • Subscribe on Stitcher
  • More
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Other Publications
    • ajnr

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Search

  • Advanced search
American Journal of Neuroradiology
American Journal of Neuroradiology

American Journal of Neuroradiology

  • Subscribe
  • Alerts
  • Log in

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Current Issue
    • Publication Preview--Ahead of Print
    • Past Issue Archive
    • Case of the Week Archive
    • Classic Case Archive
    • Case of the Month Archive
    • COVID-19 Content and Resources
  • For Authors
  • About Us
    • About AJNR
    • Editors
    • American Society of Neuroradiology
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Podcasts
    • Subscribe on iTunes
    • Subscribe on Stitcher
  • More
    • Subscribers
    • Permissions
    • Advertisers
    • Alerts
    • Feedback
  • Follow AJNR on Twitter
  • Visit AJNR on Facebook
  • Follow AJNR on Instagram
  • Join AJNR on LinkedIn
  • RSS Feeds
ReplyLETTER

Reply:

D.R. Buis, W.P. Vandertop, J.C.J. Bot, F. Barkhof, D.L. Knol, F.J. Lagerwaard, B.J. Slotman and R. van den Berg
American Journal of Neuroradiology June 2012, 33 (6) E98; DOI: https://doi.org/10.3174/ajnr.A3188
D.R. Buis
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
W.P. Vandertop
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
J.C.J. Bot
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
F. Barkhof
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
D.L. Knol
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
F.J. Lagerwaard
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
B.J. Slotman
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
R. van den Berg
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site

We thank Drs Carter and Lehman for their valuable comments on our article.

We assessed whether we could reliably use MR imaging to determine if brain arteriovenous malformations (bAVM) were obliterated after radiosurgery. Because obliteration is the “new” event during follow-up, our raters were specifically asked to look for obliteration, not for the presence of a patent nidus. Given this question, it was logical to define obliteration as a positive event, though we are aware that obliteration is absence, not presence, of disease.

To make binary decisions, we combined the groups named Probable Obliteration (PO) and Patent in our Table 3. This would have resulted in Table 3X, which was not published in the original paper1:

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 3X:

Determination of nidus obliteration on MRI2

Next, we did indeed make a mistake and used MR imaging as the reference data for DSA. We regret our error and made a correction, which was published in the April 2012 issue of the American Journal of Neuroradiology.2

The corrected Table 4 is shown below:

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 4:

Predictive value of MRI2 for DO in comparison with DSA2C

Regarding the second teaching point, we agree with Carter and Lehman's remarks. As stated in the patient-selection criteria in the paper, we included every patient who underwent radiosurgery for a bAVM in our institution and who was subjected to MR imaging and DSA before and after radiosurgery in the aforementioned sequence.1 It is, therefore, likely that our data are “enriched” with reference standard–positive cases because bAVMs tend to obliterate after radiosurgery, and most DSAs in our study were performed for the purpose of demonstrating obliteration, suggesting that the prevalence of obliterated bAVMs among our study group was high. However, in general, progressive obliteration should be a characteristic of a population of patients with bAVMs a few years after radiosurgery. We agree that readers should always interpret study results in the context of the inclusion and exclusion criteria.

References

  1. 1.
    1. Buis DR,
    2. Bot JC,
    3. Barkhof F,
    4. et al
    . The predictive value of 3D time-of-flight MR angiography in assessment of brain arteriovenous malformation obliteration after radiosurgery. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012;33:232–38
  2. 2.
    1. Buis DR,
    2. Bot JC,
    3. Barkhof F,
    4. et al
    . Erratum. AJNR Am J Neuroradiol 2012;33:e68
  • © 2012 by American Journal of Neuroradiology
Advertisement

News and Updates

  • Lucien Levy Best Research Article Award
  • Thanks to our 2022 Distinguished Reviewers
  • Press Releases

Resources

  • Evidence-Based Medicine Level Guide
  • How to Participate in a Tweet Chat
  • AJNR Podcast Archive
  • Ideas for Publicizing Your Research
  • Librarian Resources
  • Terms and Conditions

Opportunities

  • Share Your Art in Perspectives
  • Get Peer Review Credit from Publons
  • Moderate a Tweet Chat

American Society of Neuroradiology

  • Neurographics
  • ASNR Annual Meeting
  • Fellowship Portal
  • Position Statements

© 2023 by the American Society of Neuroradiology | Print ISSN: 0195-6108 Online ISSN: 1936-959X

Powered by HighWire