Interventional neurology ?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

Iamconfused

Junior Member
7+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
20+ Year Member
Joined
Jul 31, 2002
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
I have been recently exposed to the following terms- "Interventional Neurology." What does Interventional neurology entail ? Are these procedures for Neurologist which mean more $$ or does it really mean Interventional Neuroradiology.

Secondly, if this truly exists are there programs offering fellowships to Neurologists in Interventional Neurology?

Thirdly, Any monetary benefits associated with it ?

Any response will be apprecaited.

Members don't see this ad.
 
Iamconfused said:
I have been recently exposed to the following terms- "Interventional Neurology." What does Interventional neurology entail ? Are these procedures for Neurologist which mean more $$ or does it really mean Interventional Neuroradiology.

Secondly, if this truly exists are there programs offering fellowships to Neurologists in Interventional Neurology?

Thirdly, Any monetary benefits associated with it ?

Any response will be apprecaited.
BUMP - any thoughts?
 
Are these procedures for Neurologist which mean more $$ or does it really mean Interventional Neuroradiology.

The latter.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
f_w said:
The latter.

Interventional neurology, interventional neuroradiology and minimally invasive endovascular neurosurgery are all the same field more or less. It depends really on whether the fellowship is in the deparment of neurology, radiology or neurosurgery.

Many fellowship programs take applicants from "neurosciences" residencies: Radiology with a neuro-rads fellowship, neurology with either a stroke or critical care fellowship or neurosurgery.
 
as with anything, the substance is more about what you do than what you're called. of course, sometimes the pay can be more about what you're called than what you do, but that's another story.

i suppose a vascular surgeon doing carotid endarterectomies, a neurosurgeon or radiologist doing endovascular coiling of intracranial aneurysms, or a neurologist involved in deep brain stimulation (though that's more likely a neurosurgeon) could all say they're doing "interventional neurology." the term strikes me more as marketing than anything new. what most folks seem to be talking about is neurologists getting in on the money that comes with doing endovascular procedures.

i don't think it has caught on in the general population of neurologists though. even though more neurologists seem to be gung-ho about possibilities for new treatments coming up and some are hardcore intensivists, most neuro folks just aren't really rotorooter types. the overall culture of neurology just isn't very mechanical or procedural like cardiology or GI. not to say there's anything wrong with that.

as far as the name game goes, with interventional neurology, i think of it like biochemistry, biophysics, molecular biology, molecular genetics, biomolecular engineering, etc...it's just a name stamped on a very broad idea. whatever the title, as ray charles said (in the movie at least) - "it gon' do what it do, baby!"

i don't see anything wrong with neurology taking on more procedures, but i think if you really want to fix carotids, be a vascular surgeon; if you want to clip or coil aneuryms, do neurosurg, etc. etc.
 
ectopic_thought said:
as with anything, the substance is more about what you do than what you're called. of course, sometimes the pay can be more about what you're called than what you do, but that's another story.

i suppose a vascular surgeon doing carotid endarterectomies, a neurosurgeon or radiologist doing endovascular coiling of intracranial aneurysms, or a neurologist involved in deep brain stimulation (though that's more likely a neurosurgeon) could all say they're doing "interventional neurology." the term strikes me more as marketing than anything new. what most folks seem to be talking about is neurologists getting in on the money that comes with doing endovascular procedures.

i don't think it has caught on in the general population of neurologists though. even though more neurologists seem to be gung-ho about possibilities for new treatments coming up and some are hardcore intensivists, most neuro folks just aren't really rotorooter types. the overall culture of neurology just isn't very mechanical or procedural like cardiology or GI. not to say there's anything wrong with that.

as far as the name game goes, with interventional neurology, i think of it like biochemistry, biophysics, molecular biology, molecular genetics, biomolecular engineering, etc...it's just a name stamped on a very broad idea. whatever the title, as ray charles said (in the movie at least) - "it gon' do what it do, baby!"

i don't see anything wrong with neurology taking on more procedures, but i think if you really want to fix carotids, be a vascular surgeon; if you want to clip or coil aneuryms, do neurosurg, etc. etc.

The main thrust of interventional neurology is stroke. Stroke managment is being revolutionized now by the advent of invasive endovascular techniques. I disagree that neurologists should not be at the forefront of this new technology (I am not sure that is what you were implying?). It is neurologists who are most adept at understanding the natural history and pathology of cerebral vascular disease. And neurologists are best suited to provide the most comprehensive care for stroke patients, from the ER to the neuro-angio suite to the neuro-ICU and finally as outpatients.
 
Happy613 said:
I disagree that neurologists should not be at the forefront of this new technology (I am not sure that is what you were implying?).

nope. i think i said all that i meant, not implying that neurologists
shouldn't be involved in the endovascular stuff. just that as things currently stand, it will take a cultural shift in neuro for that to be commonplace among neurologists. most people who want to coil these days are either doing so called interventional radiology or neurosurg. i'd guess it will probably take a decade or more for neuro to develop a more endovascular bent and that's only if more people slowly start to finish residencies and get into that work (say, a few graduating classes or so to generate enough neurologists doing that sort of thing).
 
So they're competing with radiologists and neurosurgeons for jobs?
What is the appeal for neurosurgeons to tack on an extra year to do these minimally invasive procedures?
I've been reading up on interventional neurolgy and it seems to be synonomous with endovascular neurology.
Anyone know what the $ and lifestyle this career entails?
 
ectopic_thought said:
nope. i think i said all that i meant, not implying that neurologists
shouldn't be involved in the endovascular stuff. just that as things currently stand, it will take a cultural shift in neuro for that to be commonplace among neurologists. most people who want to coil these days are either doing so called interventional radiology or neurosurg. i'd guess it will probably take a decade or more for neuro to develop a more endovascular bent and that's only if more people slowly start to finish residencies and get into that work (say, a few graduating classes or so to generate enough neurologists doing that sort of thing).



I think you make an interesting point. Interventional neurology is a rather drastic departure from traditional neurology. Also, my introduction to the field was at UMDNJ where there is a very strong endovascular fellowship program through the department of neurology. As the field evolves I believe more medical students will get turned on to interventionalism through neurology.

I think that if one is going to train in endovascular interventions, specifically for stroke, coming from a neurology background allows you to be able to care for the patient through the whole course of the disease, not just durng the acute period.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Top