Simulation in Radiology: Endovascular and Interventional Techniques



Radiology has evolved to become essentially two distinct but closely related fields: diagnostic and interventional radiology. The use of simulation is therefore diverse in its nature when applied to radiology. In the first part of this chapter, we present the role of simulation in diagnostic radiology, which includes not only its role for practitioner training but also its role as an education tool for our patients as they prepare to undergo potentially frightening noninvasive procedures. Simulation has been utilized in very novel ways for these purposes, and we believe much of this material will be of interest to the reader and may provide others with potential beneficial applications to a variety of other specialties. In the second part of this chapter, the role of simulation in interventional radiology is presented. Given the nature of invasive radiology and its grounding as a procedure-centric specialty, simulation in this field is more similar to other interventional fields and has shown great promise.


Radiology Diagnostic radiology Ultrasound CT MRI Interventional radiology Phantoms 


  1. 1.
    Bridges M, Diamond DL. The financial impact of teaching surgical residents in the operating room. Am J Surg. 1999;177:28–32.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Salim A, Teixeira PG, Chan L, Oncel D, Inaba K, Brown C, et al. Impact of the 80-hour workweek on patient care at a level I trauma center. Arch Surg. 2007;142:708–12.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bradley P. The history of simulation in medical education and possible future directions. Med Educ. 2006;40:254–62.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kohn LT, Corrigan JM, Donaldson MS, editors. To err is human: building a safer health system. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press; 1999.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Grantcharov T, Reznick R. Teaching procedural skills. BMJ. 2008;336(7653):1129–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Gould DA, Chalmers N, Johnson SJ, Kilkenny C, White MD, Bech B, et al. Simulation: moving from technology challenge to human factors success. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2012;35(3):445–53.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Militello LG, Hutton RJ. Applied cognitive task analysis (ACTA): a practitioner’s toolkit for understanding cognitive task demands. Ergonomics. 1998;41(11):1618–41.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Johnson SJ, Hunt CM, Woolnough HM, Crawshaw M, Kilkenny C, Gould DA, et al. Virtual reality, ultrasound-guided liver biopsy simulator: development and performance discrimination. Br J Radiol. 2012;85(1013):555–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Grunwald T, Clark D, Fisher SS, McLaughlin M, Narayanan S, Piepol D. Using cognitive task analysis to facilitate collaboration in development of simulator to accelerate surgical training. Stud Health Technol Inform. 2004;98:114–20.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Bech B, Lönn L, Falkenberg M, Bartholdy NJ, Räder SB, Schroeder TV, et al. Construct validity and reliability of structured assessment of endoVascular expertise in a simulated setting. Eur J Vasc Endovasc Surg. 2011;42(4):539–48.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Smith S, Wan A, Taffinder N, Read S, Emery R, Darzi A. Early experience and validation work with Procedicus VA – the Prosolvia virtual reality shoulder arthroscopy trainer. Stud Health Technol Inform. 1999;62:337–43.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gould DA, Kessel DO, Healey AE, Johnson SJ, Lewandowski WE. Simulators in catheter-based interventional radiology: training or computer games? Clin Radiol. 2006;61:556–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Seymour NE, Gallagher AG, Roman SA, O’Brien MK, Bansal VK, Andersen DK, et al. Virtual reality training improves operating room performance: results of a randomized, double-blinded study. Ann Surg. 2002;236:458–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sedlack RE, Kolars JC. Computer simulator training enhances the competency of gastroenterology fellows at colonoscopy: results of a pilot study. Am J Gastroenterol. 2004;99:33–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Rowe R, Cohen RA. An evaluation of a virtual reality airway simulator. Anesth Analg. 2002;95:62–6.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Chaer RA, Derubertis BG, Lin SC, Bush HL, Karwowski JK, Birk D, et al. Simulation improves resident performance in catheter-based intervention: results of a randomized, controlled study. Ann Surg. 2006;244:343–52.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Dawson S. Procedural simulation: a primer. J Vasc Interv Radiol. 2006;17:205–13.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dawson DL. Training in carotid artery stenting: do carotid simulation systems really help? Vascular. 2006;14:256–63.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Berry M, Lystig T, Beard J, Klingestierna H, Reznick R, Lönn L. Porcine transfer study: virtual reality simulator training compared with porcine training in endovascular novices. Cardiovasc Intervent Radiol. 2007;30:455–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Weis G, Devaud J, Ramee S, Reisman M, Stone G, Gray W. The use of interventional cardiovascular simulation to evaluate operator performance: The Carotid Assessment of Operator Performance by the Simbionix Carotid StEnting Simulator Study (ASSESS). Simul Healthc. 2007;2:81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Dawson DL, Meyer J, Lee ES, Pevec WC. Training with simulation improves residents’ endovascular procedure skills. J Vasc Surg. 2007;45:149–54.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Wong T, Darzi A, Foale R, Schilling RJ. Virtual reality permanent pacing: Validation of a novel computerized permanent pacemaker implantation simulator. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2001;37(Suppl A):493A–4.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Johnson SJ, Guediri SM, Kilkenny C, Clough PJ. Development and validation of a virtual reality simulator: human factors input to interventional radiology training. Hum Factors. 2011;53(6):612–25.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Cleave-Hogg D, Morgan P. Experiential learning in an anaesthesia simulation centre: analysis of students’ comments. Med Teach. 2002;24(1):23–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Medical ImagingRoyal Liverpool University HospitalLiverpoolUK
  2. 2.Department of ImagingUniversity College Hospital LondonLondonUK
  3. 3.Department of RadiologyRoyal Liverpool University NHS TrustLiverpoolUK
  4. 4.University of LiverpoolLiverpoolUK

Personalised recommendations