Rad onc and interventional rads...same thing? er?

[Indryd]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I was talking to a family practice doc who said I should forget about my try for anesthesiology and instead get into interventional rads...she said it's similar to anesth in that there are lots of procedures and patient contact, but more money/prestige/free-time (her deal, not mine).

I don't see a forum for interventional rads, and I'm wondering is that another word for rad onc?

Thanks guys!

 

[RichL025]

No, interventional radiology is different than radiation oncology. IR uses radiology to make mainly catheter-based interventions (ie, stenting, catheter drainage of abscesses) and also imaging that requires a bit more finesse than your average radiologist (like cerebral angiograms). It's generally considered a fellowship after diagnostic radiology, you should check in that forum.

 

[Gfunk6]

Interventional Rads is a fellowship after Diagnostic Radiology. I would suggest looking in the Radiolog forum.

 

[Indryd]

Thanks guys!

 

[Kara]

In the current market as well as down the road, I dont know if I would completely agree with the family physician you spoke with. IR had all of those "attractive" traits she mentioned up until recently, but the tide is very quickly turning. The issue is largely a turf one: while IRs used to do anything interventional, the now cannot come within 10 ft of the heart bc Interventional Cards have long since cannabalize anything that even remotely has a "cardiac" scent to it and they are now essentially vying with vascular surgeons for any interventional procedure that is vascular. This is a trend that has also since started with Neurosurgery, Ortho (vertebroplasties), and other IM specialties (interventional GI, Nephro..etc) and there is no sign of the door swinging back in the favor of IRs. IRs are at an inherent disadvantage in this turf war because they have no power to self-refer, and are dependent for referrals. Other specialties have grown tired of having the burden of managing their patients, while IR skims off the top by doing a quick lucrative procedure before sending the patients right back. Thats why we see these growing "interventional" arm to almost all of these specialties. In an effort to save the field from degenerating into Abcess drainage technician, many IRs forsee that their profession will have to transition into one that is more "surgery-like" (in practice and lifestyle) in that they plan on admitting, rounding, and following-up on their own patients (it has already started happening). I think thats great because you have more patient contact and more patient responsibilities, but I'm sure thats not how everyone feels. Also, how successful they will be in convincing the local GP to refer his/her case of uterine fibroids to them instead of to a Gyn is another story. Of course, the status of the turf tug-of-war varies with the politics of every hospital. Few hospitals, such as INOVA Fairfax are faring ok, while most are not. Anyhow, you might want to do a search under "interventional radiology" or "IR" on auntminnie.com for more info.

Thanks guys!