Neurosurgery residency and fellowship education in the United States: 2 decades of system development by the One Neurosurgery Summit organizations.

The purpose of this report is to chronicle a 2-decade period of educational innovation and improvement, as well as governance reform, across the specialty of neurological surgery. Neurological surgery educational and professional governance systems have evolved substantially over the past 2 decades with the goal of improving training outcomes, patient safety, and the quality of US neurosurgical care. Innovations during this period have included the following: creating a consensus national curriculum; standardizing the length and structure of neurosurgical training; introducing educational outcomes milestones and required case minimums; establishing national skills, safety, and professionalism courses; systematically accrediting subspecialty fellowships; expanding professional development for educators; promoting training in research; and coordinating policy and strategy through the cooperation of national stakeholder organizations. A series of education summits held between 2007 and 2009 restructured some aspects of neurosurgical residency training. Since 2010, ongoing meetings of the One Neurosurgery Summit have provided strategic coordination for specialty definition, neurosurgical education, public policy, and governance. The Summit now includes leadership representatives from the Society of Neurological Surgeons, the American Association of Neurological Surgeons, the Congress of Neurological Surgeons, the American Board of Neurological Surgery, the Review Committee for Neurological Surgery of the Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education, the American Academy of Neurological Surgery, and the AANS/CNS Joint Washington Committee. Together, these organizations have increased the effectiveness and efficiency of the specialty of neurosurgery in advancing educational best practices, aligning policymaking, and coordinating strategic planning in order to meet the highest standards of professionalism and promote public health.

Sheltered Neurosurgery During COVID-19: The Emory Experience.

BACKGROUND: The 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has directly and indirectly impacted health care systems, including residency programs. Social distancing, cancellation of elective cases, and staff re-deployment have compromised clinical and academic teaching. We describe the neurosurgical experience at Emory University during the COVID-19 pandemic and the impact of COVID-19-related policies on resident experience. METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all neurosurgical cases performed at Emory University Hospital between March 16, the day cancellation of elective cases was effective, and April 15, 2020, and the same period in the preceding 3 years. For the study period, we collected the number of cases and their distribution by subspecialty along with total hospital charges. RESULTS: Compared with an average of 606 cases performed during the study period over the past 3 years, only 145 neurosurgical cases were performed between March 16 and April 15, 2020, which corresponds to an 80% reduction in case volume and 66% decrease in hospital revenue in 2020. When divided by subspecialty, the most significant reduction was observed in functional (84%; P < 0.01) followed by spine (78%; P < 0.01) surgery, although all subspecialties were significantly impacted. Assessing junior resident experience, we observed a significant reduction in number of neurosurgical admissions (47%; P < 0.01) and bedside procedures (59%; P < 0.01) in the study period in 2020 compared with the past 3 years, with no significant reduction in number of consultations (17%; P > 0.1). CONCLUSIONS: Even at academic centers that were not hugely impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic, prophylactic and preparedness measures still exhibited an unprecedented toll on neurosurgical resident and fellow experience.

Current Perspectives in Imaging Modalities for the Assessment of Unruptured Intracranial Aneurysms: A Comparative Analysis and Review.

BACKGROUND: Intracranial aneurysms (IAs) are pathologic dilatations of cerebral arteries. This systematic review summarizes and compares imaging techniques for assessing unruptured IAs (UIAs). This review also addresses their uses in different scopes of practice. Pathophysiologic mechanisms are reviewed to better understand the clinical usefulness of each imaging modality. METHODS: A literature review was performed using PubMed with these search terms: "intracranial aneurysm," "cerebral aneurysm," "magnetic resonance angiography (MRA)," computed tomography angiography (CTA)," "catheter angiography," "digital subtraction angiography," "molecular imaging," "ferumoxytol," and "myeloperoxidase". Only studies in English were cited. RESULTS: Since the development and improvement of noninvasive diagnostic imaging (computed tomography angiography and magnetic resonance angiography), many prospective studies and meta-analyses have compared these tests with gold standard digital subtraction angiography (DSA). Although computed tomography angiography and magnetic resonance angiography have lower detection rates for UIAs, they are vital in the treatment and follow-up of UIAs. The reduction in ionizing radiation and lack of endovascular instrumentation with these modalities provide benefits compared with DSA. Novel molecular imaging techniques to detect inflammation within the aneurysmal wall with the goal of stratifying risk based on level of inflammation are under investigation. CONCLUSIONS: DSA remains the gold standard for preoperative planning and follow-up for patients with IA. Newer imaging modalities such as ferumoxytol-enhanced magnetic resonance imaging are emerging techniques that provide critical in vivo information about the inflammatory milieu within aneurysm walls. With further study, these techniques may provide aneurysm rupture risk and prediction models for individualized patient care.

Financial burden associated with the residency match in neurological surgery.

OBJECTIVE Application for a residency position in neurosurgery is a highly competitive process. Visiting subinternships and interviews are integral parts of the application process that provide applicants and programs with important information, often influencing rank list decisions. However, the process is an expensive one that places significant financial burden on applicants. In this study, the authors aimed to quantify expenses incurred by 1st-year neurosurgery residents who matched into a neurosurgery residency program in 2014 and uncover potential trends in expenses. METHODS A 10-question survey was distributed in partnership with the Society of Neurological Surgeons to all 1st-year neurosurgery residents in the United States. The survey asked respondents about the number of subinternships, interviews, and second looks (after the interview) attended and the resultant costs, the type of program match, preferences for subinternship interviews, and suggestions for changes they would like to see in the application process. In addition to compiling overall results, also examined were the data for differences in cost when stratifying for region of the medical school or whether the respondent had contact with the program they matched to prior to the interview process (matched to home or subinternship program). RESULTS The survey had a 64.4% response rate. The mean total expenses for all components of the application process were US $10,255, with interview costs comprising the majority of the expenses (69.0%). No difference in number of subinternships, interviews, or second looks attended, or their individual and total costs, was seen for applicants from different regions of the United States. Respondents who matched to their home or subinternship program attended fewer interviews than respondents who had no prior contact with their matched program (13.5 vs 16.4, respectively, p = 0.0023) but incurred the same overall costs (mean $9774 vs $10,566; p = 0.58). CONCLUSIONS Securing a residency position in neurosurgery is a costly process for applicants. No differences are seen when stratifying by region of medical school attended or contact with a program prior to interviewing. Interview costs comprise the majority of expenses for applicants, and changes to the application process are needed to control costs incurred by applicants.

Gauging the feasibility of cost-sharing and medical student interest groups to reduce interview costs.

Indirect costs of the interview tour can be prohibitive. The authors sought to assess the desire of interviewees to mitigate these costs through ideas such as sharing hotel rooms and transportation, willingness to stay with local students, and the preferred modality to coordinate this collaboration. A survey link was posted on the Uncle Harvey website and the Facebook profile page of fourth-year medical students from 6 different medical schools shortly after the 2014 match day. There were a total of 156 respondents to the survey. The majority of the respondents were postinterview medical students (65.4%), but preinterview medical students (28.2%) and current residents (6.4%) also responded to the survey. Most respondents were pursuing a field other than neurosurgery (75.0%) and expressed a desire to share a hotel room and/or transportation (77.4%) as well as stay in the dorm room of a medical student at the program in which they are interviewing (70.0%). Students going into neurosurgery were significantly more likely to be interested in sharing hotel/transportation (89.2% neurosurgery vs 72.8% nonneurosurgery; p = 0.040) and in staying in the dorm room of a local student when on interviews (85.0% neurosurgery vs 57.1% nonneurosurgery; p = 0.040) than those going into other specialties. Among postinterview students, communication was preferred to be by private, email identification-only chat room. Given neurosurgery resident candidates' interest in collaborating to reduce interview costs, consideration should be given to creating a system that could allow students to coordinate cost sharing between interviewees. Moreover, interviewees should be connected to local students from neurosurgery interest groups as a resource.

Multidisciplinary consensus on assessment of unruptured intracranial aneurysms: proposal of an international research group.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: To address the increasing need to counsel patients about treatment indications for unruptured intracranial aneurysms (UIA), we endeavored to develop a consensus on assessment of UIAs among a group of specialists from diverse fields involved in research and treatment of UIAs. METHODS: After composition of the research group, a Delphi consensus was initiated to identify and rate all features, which may be relevant to assess UIAs and their treatment by using ranking scales and analysis of inter-rater agreement (IRA) for each factor. IRA was categorized as very high, high, moderate, or low. RESULTS: Ultimately, 39 specialists from 4 specialties agreed (high or very high IRAs) on the following key factors for or against UIA treatment decisions: (1) patient age, life expectancy, and comorbid diseases; (2) previous subarachnoid hemorrhage from a different aneurysm, family history for UIA or subarachnoid hemorrhage, nicotine use; (3) UIA size, location, and lobulation; (4) UIA growth or de novo formation on serial imaging; (5) clinical symptoms (cranial nerve deficit, mass effect, and thromboembolic events from UIAs); and (6) risk factors for UIA treatment (patient age and life expectancy, UIA size, and estimated risk of treatment). However, IRAs for features rated with low relevance were also generally low, which underlined the existing controversy about the natural history of UIAs. CONCLUSIONS: Our results highlight that neurovascular specialists currently consider many features as important when evaluating UIAs but also highlight that the appreciation of natural history of UIAs remains uncertain, even within a group of highly informed individuals.

Evaluation of a new bipolar coagulation forceps in a thermal damage assessment.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether a novel bipolar forceps device that uses heat-pipe technology to manage tissue temperature would result in less tissue injury compared with a conventional antistick forceps design. METHODS: In ex vivo and in vivo experiments, lesions were compared at generator powers of 35 and 50 Malis units and at 3- and 10-second activation times. For the ex vivo studies, lesions were produced in specimens of fresh calf liver. Tissue temperatures were measured by using thermocouples placed in the tissue and also estimated by obtaining thermal photography. Rats were used for the in vivo studies, in which lesions were produced on the surface of the exposed cerebral hemispheres and assessed by histological examination. The extent of tissue injury was determined for both the ex vivo and in vivo studies. RESULTS: Thermographic and thermometric studies revealed significant tissue temperature reductions at the tips of heat-pipe forceps compared with conventional antistick forceps. In both the ex vivo and in vivo studies, there was less tissue injury produced by the heat-pipe forceps, and this difference was most pronounced with longer activation times. CONCLUSION: Bipolar forceps containing heat pipes more effectively limits excessive thermal spread, thereby potentially reducing the risk of unintended injury to collateral or peripheral tissue.