Med Student perception/understanding of interventional radiology?

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

TheRealDrDorian

Dr. Acula
15+ Year Member
Joined
Nov 4, 2006
Messages
264
Reaction score
11
Hey all. Just wanted to know what (if any) experience with interventional radiology med students are getting these days. I know personally I stumbled upon it during my M2 year shadowing in general radiology and loved it from the start, but like Radiation Oncology/Urology/ENT, there wasn't a real way to learn about the field unless you found it on your own.

Do you guys have any exposure to IR built into curriculums? How did you guys find out about the field (if you even have...)? Just trying to start a conversation. Thanks.
 
Sorry Dr. Dorian. I think you are in the wrong forum. This is the pre-med forum.
 
Hey all. Just wanted to know what (if any) experience with interventional radiology med students are getting these days. I know personally I stumbled upon it during my M2 year shadowing in general radiology and loved it from the start, but like Radiation Oncology/Urology/ENT, there wasn't a real way to learn about the field unless you found it on your own.

Do you guys have any exposure to IR built into curriculums? How did you guys find out about the field (if you even have...)? Just trying to start a conversation. Thanks.

You're in the wrong forum, but....

you'll probably "stumble" across and learn about this field while in your Neuro, EM, Critical Care, GI, Cards (if they have you in the cath lab) or maybe medicine rotations...maybe depending on your program, you'll go a bit more in depth in cardiology, neuro or GI electives? Obviously M3 M4s will have more insight than I (a premed) will.
 
A general interest in anatomy+ pathology+ a desire to make lots of $$$$ = Interventional Radiology. Now the real question is why anyone would limit the scope of their practice and go the direct IR route that is available these days (vs traditional route). After all, when I'm 50 and have tons of radiation exposure, I'd like the opportunity to go read some films instead of sitting in an active beam on my feet all day. Add that to the fact that the field is being sold off in pieces (neuro doing stints, cards doing stints, vascular doing stints, etc) and IR is getting stuck with the less-desirable procedures, it makes some people wonder what the best way to go is!

🙂
 
You're in the wrong forum, but....

you'll probably "stumble" across and learn about this field while in your Neuro, EM, Critical Care, GI, Cards (if they have you in the cath lab) or maybe medicine rotations...maybe depending on your program, you'll go a bit more in depth in cardiology, neuro or GI electives? Obviously M3 M4s will have more insight than I (a premed) will.

interventional radiology and interventional cardiology are not the same thing. You won't find IR involved with the "cath lab". Those folk are all cardiologists. Coronaries are not vessels the IR folks play with, so doubtful you will get exposed to IR on cards rotations unless their groin access is very traumatic and they need help controlling the bleeding.

You will see a lot of IR consults on GI and trauma rotations, and they will put drains into your patients on medicine and surgery. Neuro-IR is a separate subspecialty at some hospitals, and you will see a lot of them on neuro and neurosurgery rotations,

In general every specialty you won't see on rotations is happy to have med student come shadow -- you just have to find the time (usually in your early years) and be proactive.
 
interventional radiology and interventional cardiology are not the same thing. You won't find IR involved with the "cath lab". Those folk are all cardiologists. Coronaries are not vessels the IR folks play with, so doubtful you will get exposed to IR on cards rotations unless their groin access is very traumatic and they need help controlling the bleeding.

You will see a lot of IR consults on GI and trauma rotations, and they will put drains into your patients on medicine and surgery. Neuro-IR is a separate subspecialty at some hospitals, and you will see a lot of them on neuro and neurosurgery rotations,

In general every specialty you won't see on rotations is happy to have med student come shadow -- you just have to find the time (usually in your early years) and be proactive.

I don't think it's too far stretched to believe that a MS3 on a cards rotation with cath experience can count that as an intro to interventional radiology (or procedures for that matter), as it's basically the same thing with different operators.
 
I don't think it's too far stretched to believe that a MS3 on a cards rotation with cath experience can count that as an intro to interventional radiology (or procedures for that matter), as it's basically the same thing with different operators.

Um no, it's not, and I think neither radiologists nor cardiologists would agree with that statement. That would be like saying ortho is the equivalent intro to general surgery because both are surgery. Radiology and cardiology have some ongoing turf battles over imaging but are for the most part about as different in terms of fields as any two you could pick.
 
We have a dedicated radiology class one day a week and it's otherwise incorporated into our lectures where necessary e.g. when we did the GI system we had quite a few lectures on different imaging techniques and their relations to different conditions.

It's not something which particularly interests me. I have little interest/talent for anatomy and I like patients (and sunlight) so it's not something I'd ever be interested in specialising in.
 
Eh Cards being similar to IR isn't too far off for vascular access procedures like angios. Access groin, insert cath/wire, manipulate to desired location and inject contrast. IR has a lot of other procedures too.
 
We have a dedicated radiology class one day a week

That is actually really good. I feel like a lot of medical schools do not spend enough time on radiology, despite the fact that imaging plays a huge role in medicine today.
 
Hey all. Just wanted to know what (if any) experience with interventional radiology med students are getting these days. I know personally I stumbled upon it during my M2 year shadowing in general radiology and loved it from the start, but like Radiation Oncology/Urology/ENT, there wasn't a real way to learn about the field unless you found it on your own.

Do you guys have any exposure to IR built into curriculums? How did you guys find out about the field (if you even have...)? Just trying to start a conversation. Thanks.

I came across it as an M3. On pediatrics we had a the peds IR guys do an ablation of a vascular malformation and just wanted the patient to be obs overnight. I remember reading the name of the procedure and thinking, "what the heck is that?"

About a month later I was on IM, we took a transfer from the ICU. The patient had cholangiocarcinoma... diagnosed 5 years ago. If you know anything about cholangiocarcinoma, it has a prognosis of <12 months survival from the time of diagnosis to death. While I was reading into the patients history, I saw that a few weeks prior he had a TACE (trans-arterial chemoembolization) procedure done. He had had a total of 3-4 done over the years. I thought to myself, "what the heck is that?" When I read about it, I was shocked that such a procedure existed, and that this man was suppose to die 5 years ago, but was still alive and well.

Then another 2 months went by and I saw my first EVAR done by an interventional radiologist. The variety and possibilities of minimally invasive procedures seemed endless. The rest is history. I was hooked.
 
Eh Cards being similar to IR isn't too far off for vascular access procedures like angios. Access groin, insert cath/wire, manipulate to desired location and inject contrast. IR has a lot of other procedures too.

Even the approach to groin access is different. Again it's a field with some similarities but not enough that seeing one gives you any useful perspective on the other.
 
Hey all. Just wanted to know what (if any) experience with interventional radiology med students are getting these days. I know personally I stumbled upon it during my M2 year shadowing in general radiology and loved it from the start, but like Radiation Oncology/Urology/ENT, there wasn't a real way to learn about the field unless you found it on your own.

Do you guys have any exposure to IR built into curriculums? How did you guys find out about the field (if you even have...)? Just trying to start a conversation. Thanks.

The perception is that you guys get all the procedures that nobody else wants because you don't "own" any patients. IR is not built into the curriculum at my school besides some cursory discussion of select procedures. There were 3 lectures on Interventional Cardio during the cardiology block.
 
Even the approach to groin access is different. Again it's a field with some similarities but not enough that seeing one gives you any useful perspective on the other.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interventional_cardiology

Interventional cardiology is a branch of cardiology that deals specifically with the catheter based treatment of structural heart diseases. Andreas Gruentzig is considered the father of interventional cardiology after the development of angioplasty by interventional radiologist, Dr. Charles Dotter.[1]

Tooooooooooootalllllllllllllllllllllllllllllly different fields that have nothing to do with one another.🙄

You are right about the personalities of the folks in each respective field though. The IR folks tend to be laid back, and the cards folks... well, they tend to be like you.


Edit: More history since it's interesting...

Development of the diagnostic coronary angiogram

In 1958, Interventional Radiologist, Dr. Charles Dotter began working on methods to visualize the coronary anatomy via sequential radiographic films. He invented a method known as occlusive aortography in an animal model. Occlusive aortography involved the transient occlusion of the aorta and subsequent injection of a small amount of radiographic contrast agent into the aortic root and subsequent serial x-rays to visualize the coronary arteries.[6] This method produced impressive images of the coronary anatomy. Dotter later reported that all the animals used in the procedure survived.[citation needed]

Later that same year, while performing an aortic root aortography, Mason Sones, a pediatric cardiologist at the Cleveland Clinic, noted that the catheter had accidentally entered the patient's right coronary artery. Before the catheter could be removed, 30cc of contrast agent had been injected.[7] While the patient went into ventricular fibrillation, the dangerous arrhythmia was terminated by Dr. Sones promptly performing a precordial thump which restored sinus rhythm. This became the world's first selective coronary arteriogram. Until that time, it was believed that even a small amount of contrast agent within a coronary artery would be fatal.

Until the 1950s, placing a catheter into either the arterial or venous system involved a "cut down" procedure, in which the soft tissues were dissected out of the way until the artery or vein was directly visualized and subsequently punctured by a catheter; this was known as the Sones technique. The percutaneous approach that is widely used today was developed by Sven-Ivar Seldinger in 1953.[8][9] This method was used initially for the visualization of the peripheral arteries.[citation needed] Percutaneous access of the artery or vein is still commonly known as the Seldinger technique. The use of the Seldinger technique for visualizing the coronary arteries was described by Ricketts and Abrams in 1962 and Judkins in 1967.[10][11]

By the late 1960s, Melvin Judkins had begun work on creating catheters that were specially shaped to reach the coronary arteries to perform selective coronary angiography. His initial work involved shaping stiff wires and comparing those shapes to radiographs of the ascending aorta to determine if the shape appeared promising. Then he would place the stiff wire inside a flexible catheter and use a heat-fixation method to permanently shape the catheter. In the first use of these catheters in humans, each catheter was specifically shaped to match the size and shape of the aorta of the subject. His work was documented in 1967, and by 1968 the Judkins catheters were manufactured in a limited number of fixed tip shapes.[12] Catheters in these shapes carry his name and are still used to this day for selective coronary angiography.
Dawn of the interventional era

The use of a balloon-tipped catheter for the treatment of atherosclerotic vascular disease was first described by Charles Dotter and Melvin Judkins in 1964, when they used it to treat a case of atherosclerotic disease in the superficial femoral artery of the left leg.[13][14] Building on their work and his own research involving balloon-tipped catheters, Andreas Gruentzig performed the first success percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (known as PTCA or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)) on a human on September 16, 1977 at University Hospital, Zurich.[15] The results of the procedure were presented at the American Heart Association meeting two months later to a stunned audience of cardiologists. In the subsequent three years, Dr. Gruentzig performed coronary angioplasties in 169 patients in Zurich, while teaching the practice of coronary angioplasty to a field of budding interventional cardiologists. It is interesting to note that ten years later, nearly 90 percent of these individuals were still alive.[15] By the mid 1980s, over 300,000 PTCAs were being performed on a yearly basis, equalling the number of bypass surgeries being performed for coronary artery disease.[16]
 
The perception is that you guys get all the procedures that nobody else wants because you don't "own" any patients. IR is not built into the curriculum at my school besides some cursory discussion of select procedures. There were 3 lectures on Interventional Cardio during the cardiology block.

What school are you at? Agreed that IR (and not really DR for that matter) wasn't built into the curriculum at my school either. I stumbled upon it.

I agree for the most part that this is how it exists now, but will be interested to see how IR develops as a field over the next 10-15 years with the new dual certificate being accepted (http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=949675). I foresee IR breaking into it's own residency, much like radiation oncology broke off in the 70's (I think), becoming much more clinical. Even in DR you have to know the normal pathology of disease to truly be a good radiologist (e.g. I've seen some reads stating MS on MRI, when the patient has zero clinical symptoms, making the radiologist lose credibility); I think being a true clinician is enhanced with IR, where you're essentially a surgeon.

As Dotter said in 1968:
"If my fellow angiographers prove unwilling or unable to accept or secure for their patients the clinical responsibilities attendant on transluminal angioplasty, they will become high-priced plumbers facing forfeiture of territorial rights based solely on imaging equipment others can obtain and skill still others can learn." &#8212;Charles Dotter, American College of Surgery meeting in 1968
 
My initial exposure to IR was in undergrad. It was a great experience and made me interested in learning more and more about it. Now that I'm a medical student the only exposure I would get would be on rotations, I suppose. Last I checked my school has an IR elective rotation. I'm not sure if that is still the case, but if it is I will definitely be doing it!
 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interventional_cardiology

Interventional cardiology is a branch of cardiology that deals specifically with the catheter based treatment of structural heart diseases. Andreas Gruentzig is considered the father of interventional cardiology after the development of angioplasty by interventional radiologist, Dr. Charles Dotter.[1]

Tooooooooooootalllllllllllllllllllllllllllllly different fields that have nothing to do with one another.🙄

You are right about the personalities of the folks in each respective field though. The IR folks tend to be laid back, and the cards folks... well, they tend to be like you.


Edit: More history since it's interesting...

Development of the diagnostic coronary angiogram

In 1958, Interventional Radiologist, Dr. Charles Dotter began working on methods to visualize the coronary anatomy via sequential radiographic films. He invented a method known as occlusive aortography in an animal model. Occlusive aortography involved the transient occlusion of the aorta and subsequent injection of a small amount of radiographic contrast agent into the aortic root and subsequent serial x-rays to visualize the coronary arteries.[6] This method produced impressive images of the coronary anatomy. Dotter later reported that all the animals used in the procedure survived.[citation needed]

Later that same year, while performing an aortic root aortography, Mason Sones, a pediatric cardiologist at the Cleveland Clinic, noted that the catheter had accidentally entered the patient's right coronary artery. Before the catheter could be removed, 30cc of contrast agent had been injected.[7] While the patient went into ventricular fibrillation, the dangerous arrhythmia was terminated by Dr. Sones promptly performing a precordial thump which restored sinus rhythm. This became the world's first selective coronary arteriogram. Until that time, it was believed that even a small amount of contrast agent within a coronary artery would be fatal.

Until the 1950s, placing a catheter into either the arterial or venous system involved a "cut down" procedure, in which the soft tissues were dissected out of the way until the artery or vein was directly visualized and subsequently punctured by a catheter; this was known as the Sones technique. The percutaneous approach that is widely used today was developed by Sven-Ivar Seldinger in 1953.[8][9] This method was used initially for the visualization of the peripheral arteries.[citation needed] Percutaneous access of the artery or vein is still commonly known as the Seldinger technique. The use of the Seldinger technique for visualizing the coronary arteries was described by Ricketts and Abrams in 1962 and Judkins in 1967.[10][11]

By the late 1960s, Melvin Judkins had begun work on creating catheters that were specially shaped to reach the coronary arteries to perform selective coronary angiography. His initial work involved shaping stiff wires and comparing those shapes to radiographs of the ascending aorta to determine if the shape appeared promising. Then he would place the stiff wire inside a flexible catheter and use a heat-fixation method to permanently shape the catheter. In the first use of these catheters in humans, each catheter was specifically shaped to match the size and shape of the aorta of the subject. His work was documented in 1967, and by 1968 the Judkins catheters were manufactured in a limited number of fixed tip shapes.[12] Catheters in these shapes carry his name and are still used to this day for selective coronary angiography.
Dawn of the interventional era

The use of a balloon-tipped catheter for the treatment of atherosclerotic vascular disease was first described by Charles Dotter and Melvin Judkins in 1964, when they used it to treat a case of atherosclerotic disease in the superficial femoral artery of the left leg.[13][14] Building on their work and his own research involving balloon-tipped catheters, Andreas Gruentzig performed the first success percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (known as PTCA or percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI)) on a human on September 16, 1977 at University Hospital, Zurich.[15] The results of the procedure were presented at the American Heart Association meeting two months later to a stunned audience of cardiologists. In the subsequent three years, Dr. Gruentzig performed coronary angioplasties in 169 patients in Zurich, while teaching the practice of coronary angioplasty to a field of budding interventional cardiologists. It is interesting to note that ten years later, nearly 90 percent of these individuals were still alive.[15] By the mid 1980s, over 300,000 PTCAs were being performed on a yearly basis, equalling the number of bypass surgeries being performed for coronary artery disease.[16]

That they have the same genesis isn't relevant. Ortho and all the surgical subspecialties originated out of from general surgery but aren't similar fields today. In faster moving technology driven specialties such as these, anything that happened in the 50s, 60s, 70s and even 1980s, might as well have been done by cave men -- has no relevance to the specialties today. Heck, most of the instruments currently used in each of these fields today weren't even in development until ten years ago.
 
At my school (unless you do an IR elective), exposure is limited to "call IR for X procedure" that we want done under image guidance

With X usually being an LP that failed w/out fluoro or a drain placement.
 
Went to IR with a patient on IM. I loved IR. Very very cool field, but I did want more patient contact and a larger role in procedures.

I liked urology because they do fluoro work but also operate, etc.
 
That they have the same genesis isn't relevant. Ortho and all the surgical subspecialties originated out of from general surgery but aren't similar fields today. In faster moving technology driven specialties such as these, anything that happened in the 50s, 60s, 70s and even 1980s, might as well have been done by cave men -- has no relevance to the specialties today. Heck, most of the instruments currently used in each of these fields today weren't even in development until ten years ago.

By your logic, cardiac MR has nothing to do with abdominal MR. They are related and you can learn a lot about both fields by being introduced to either one. What differs in specific techniques and culture of the field is obviously specific to each subspecialty. You learn a lot about angiography in IR (obviously...) and this is very relevant to to the Cath Lab.
 
My only real exposure to IR (as in being down in IR, watching a procedure) is now, as a M3 on a vascular surgery rotation. Seen a few EVARs with a vascular surgeon + IR attending both present.
 
interventional_radiology_mug-p168881788455235528en84e_400.jpg


Probably one of the most envelope pushing specialties in medicine. We will see how things shape up in the next decade or so with Interventional Radiology transforming to a specialty that is run in a manner more typical to a surgical subspecialty (formal consults, admits, clinic follow up, inpatient progress notes post procedure). That is how it was run in my medical school. However, I will be the first to admit that this is not the most common way to see it run. It is a trend that is slowly catching on.
 
Last edited:
Top