Training and Credentialing in Endovascular Surgery

  • G. Patrick Clagett
  • Kenneth E. McIntyreJr.

Abstract

The explosive interest in minimally invasive endoluminal repair of occlusive lesions and aortic aneurysms and the extension of this technology to the repair of traumatic lesions, arteriovenous malformations, and fistulas is having a major impact on the direction of training in vascular surgery. Although the durability and long-term success of endoluminal procedures are only beginning to be known (especially in comparison to conventional, open vascular surgical procedures), it is likely that vascular repairs performed transluminally will comprise a significant portion of vascular surgical practice in the future. A large body of preliminary work suggests that this approach offers a potentially better method to treat a significant proportion of vascular surgical cases because of reduced morbidity and mortality and enthusiastic patient acceptance.1 It has been estimated that within the next decade one-third to one-half of vascular prosthetic reconstructions currently carried out by open surgical approaches could be replaced by endovascular prostheses inserted percutaneously or by open means from a remote access site.1 The inference is clear: If these devices prove successful over time, a significant amount of conventional vascular surgery will become obsolete.

Keywords

Stent Placement Vascular Surgeon Endovascular Surgery Primary Interventionalist Cular Surgery 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Veith FJ: Transluminally placed endovascular stented grafts and their impact on vascular surgery, J Vasc Surg 20: 855–860, 1994.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    1993–94 Graduate Medical Education Directory, ed 79, Chicago, 1993, American Medical Association, pp 133–135.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Clagett GP, Silver D, Veith FJ et al: Impact of new technology on vascular surgery training, J Endovasc Surg 2: 133–135, 1995.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    White RA, Fogarty TJ, Baker WH et al: Endovascular surgery credentialing and training for vascular surgeons, J Vasc Surg 17: 1095–1102, 1993.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    White RA, Hodgson KJ, Ahn SS et al: Endovascular interventions training and credentialing for vascular surgeons, J Vasc Surg 1998 (in press).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Calligaro KD, Dougherty MJ, Patterson DE et al: Value of an endovascular suite in the operating room, Ann Vasc Surg 12: 296–298, 1998.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Ballard JL, Sparks SR, Taylor FC et al: Complications of iliac artery stent deployment, J Vasc Surg 24: 545–555, 1996.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    McIntyre KE, Walser E, Hagman J et al: Mycotic aneurysm of the common iliac artery and distal aorta following stent placement, Vasc Surg 31: 551–557, 1997.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Moore WS, Clagett GP, Hobson RW II et al: Vision of optimal vascular surgical training in the next two decades: strategies for adapting to new technologies, J Vasc Surg 23: 926–931, 1996.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1999

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. Patrick Clagett
  • Kenneth E. McIntyreJr.

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations