https://www.selleckchem.com/products/arry-380-ont-380.html Eight eyes (88.9%) were improved and 1 eye (11.1%) had only visual field improvement. However, patients whose visual impairment was in the range of finger count and hand motion were not recovered beyond the quantitatively measurable level even after OND. CONCLUSIONS Endoscopic OND in patients with optic neuropathy caused by a fibro-osseous tumor in the sinonasal region is safe and worth trying to improve visual outcomes. Early therapeutic OND is recommended before the patient's visual function is decreased below quantitatively measurable vision. INTRODUCTION Two main techniques for endovascular treatment of acute ischemic stroke patients are direct aspiration and stent retriever thrombectomy. We hypothesized that the direct aspiration approach would be less costly than the stent retriever approach. MATERIALS AND METHODS We constructed a decision tree based upon the two approaches for endovascular treatment. Branch point probabilities were obtained from the best available, recent published literature. Costs were based on the list prices of medical devices from vendors. From this we obtained a base-case analysis and conducted sensitivity analysis. #link# RESULTS Our base-case analysis revealed that the incremental cost-per-patient for endovascular treatment were US$5,937 for direct aspiration first technique and US$9,914 for stent retriever first technique. The cost difference per patient treated was US$3,977. To drive the stent retriever first therapy to be the less costly option, the cost of stent retriever first technique has to go down more than 50%. Stent retriever-first carries lower cost when the success rate of first line aspiration is lower than 14.6%, which is highly improbable. Two-way sensitivity analysis revealed scenarios in which stent retriever first approach would be less costly than the direct aspiration first approach; however, conditions required for these scenarios are rarely encountered i