Factors influencing selection of an interventional radiology training program.

PURPOSE: To understand factors influencing the choice and ranking of Interventional Radiology (IR) training programs among a cohort of medical students and diagnostic radiology residents pursuing careers in IR. MATERIALS AND METHODS: An IRB approved, 34 question online survey (surveymonkey.com) evaluated the impact of twenty-two different factors and demographics on IR training program selection for medical students and residents. The factors analyzed included programmatic features, location characteristics, academic reputation, program size, benefits/financial incentives, emphasis on clinical care, and future job opportunities. Comparison of Likert scale responses between medical students and residents were performed by using unpaired two-sample t-tests. RESULTS: 181 (145 male, 35 female) individuals responded to the survey, 74 medical students (40.9%) and 107 residents (59.1%). Medical students and residents both selected variety of IR cases as the most important and highest rated factor when choosing an IR program. Medical students ranked availability of a mentor (p = .03), inpatient consultation service (p = .003), outpatient clinic experience (p = .003), and ICU rotation experience (p < .001) significantly higher. Residents rated job placement/accomplishments of prior fellows (p = .03) and opinion of spouse/significant others (p = .002) significantly higher than medical students. CONCLUSIONS: The top rated factors are similar among medical students and residents however medical students value the clinical aspects of the program (ICU experience, inpatient consultation service, outpatient clinic) more than residents. Residents placed more value on job placement opportunities in selecting an IR program.

Propensity-matched comparison of transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt placement techniques: Intracardiac echocardiography (ICE) versus fluoroscopic guidance.

PURPOSE: To compare procedure characteristics and outcomes when TIPS is performed under intracardiac echocardiography guidance (iTIPS) compared to conventional fluoroscopic guidance (cTIPS). MATERIALS AND METHODS: A retrospective propensity-matched study of 30 iTIPS and 30 cTIPS procedures from January 2014 to March 2017 at a single US high volume academic medical center was performed. iTIPS and cTIPS cases were propensity score matched using predictive variables: age, race, gender, etiology of liver disease, indication for TIPS, MELD score, and portal vein patency. Procedure characteristics and post- procedure outcomes were compared between propensity-matched groups including: total procedure time, technical success, radiation dose, contrast volume, complication rate, 30- day mortality, and revision rate within 3 months. RESULTS: Radiation dose (875.3 vs 457.4 mGY, p = 0.039) and contrast volume (141 vs 103 mL, p = 0.005) were significantly decreased in the iTIPS versus the cTIPS group. There was no significant difference in procedure time (81.5 cTIPS vs 84 min iTIPS) or rate of TIPS revisions within 3 months. Average operator experience in the iTIPs group was 4.2 years and cTIPS group 11.0 years (p = 0.0004). All procedures were technically successful with no mortalities within 30 days. CONCLUSION: iTIPS resulted in significantly reduced radiation dose and contrast volume. However, there was no difference in total procedure time or overall outcomes despite greater operator experience in the cTIPS group.

Cryoablation of low-flow vascular malformations.

PURPOSE: We aimed to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of cryoablation in the treatment of low-flow malformations, specifically venous malformation (VM) and fibroadipose vascular anomaly (FAVA). METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of 11 consecutive patients with low-flow malformations (14 lesions; 9 VM, 5 FAVA), median lesion volume 10.8 cm3, (range, 1.8-55.6 cm3) with a median age of 19 years (range, 10-50 years) who underwent cryoablation to achieve symptomatic control. Average follow-up was at a median of 207 days postprocedure (range, 120-886 days). Indications for treatment included focal pain and swelling. Technical success was achieved if the cryoablation ice ball covered the region of the malformation that corresponded to the patient's symptoms. Clinical success was considered complete if all symptoms resolved and partial if some symptoms persisted but did not necessitate further treatment. RESULTS: The technical success rate was 100%. At 1-month follow-up, 13 of 14 lesions (93%) had a complete response and one (7%) had a partial response. At 6-month follow-up 12 of 13 (92%) had a complete response and 1 (8%) had a partial response. A total of 6 patients underwent primary cryoablation. Out of 9 VM cases, 7 had prior sclerotherapy and 2 had primary cryoablation. Out of the 5 FAVA cases, 1 had prior sclerotherapy and the remaining 4 cases underwent primary cryoablation. There were 3 minor complications following cryoablation including 2 cases of skin blisters and 1 case of transient numbness. These complications resolved with conservative management. CONCLUSION: Cryoablation is safe and effective in the treatment of low-flow vascular malformations, either after sclerotherapy or as primary treatment.

Embolization of a congenital arteriovenous malformation arising off the internal mammary artery.

Congenital arteriovenous malformations (AVM) of the internal mammary artery (IMA) are exceptionally rare. Patients with AVMs arising off the left IMA may present with continuous precordial murmurs and/or a pulsatile chest mass. AVMs in this location pose a risk of enlargement, rupture, infection, or high-output cardiac failure. The potential risks associated with AVMs warrant early therapeutic intervention. We describe a case of a congenital AVM originating from the left IMA, which was successfully embolized with n­butyl cyanoacrylate (NBCA) using a transcatheter arterial approach.

Renal Embolization: Current Recommendations and Rationale for Clinical Practice.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Renal embolization (RE) is a minimally invasive endovascular procedure performed primarily by interventional radiology that can be used to treat a variety of urologic conditions including malignant renal tumors, angiomyolipomas, renal trauma, and complications following biopsy. The following review examines renal embolization indications, technique, and potential complications. RECENT FINDINGS: Renal embolization is a versatile therapeutic and adjunctive tool for many acute and chronic urologic conditions. RE has become a first-line therapy for renal trauma in lower grade injuries and increasing in prevalence for higher grade injuries. Additionally, the safety and efficacy of chemoembolization for primary treatment of renal cell carcinoma is under evaluation. A multidisciplinary approach between urology and interventional radiology should be pursued for all patients undergoing renal embolization regardless of indication. Preprocedural planning and careful monitoring of complications should be performed to optimize clinical outcomes.