(C) 2009 Elsevier Ireland Ltd and the Japan Neuroscience Society

(C) 2009 Elsevier Ireland Ltd and the Japan Neuroscience Society. All rights reserved.”
“The circle of Willis is one of the most famous eponymous structures in human anatomy. There is no doubt Thomas Willis at Oxford accurately demonstrated the anastomotic arterial supply at the base of the brain. However,

this eponymous name does not KU-60019 chemical structure reveal the history of the discovery of the ramification, nor does it give credit to the anatomists and artists who have contributed to the understanding of this clinically important structure. This article first traces the story of the discovery of the circle of Willis. Willis’ contribution and innovative approaches are then discussed. Finally, despite Willis’ not being the first to describe the circle, we explain why he still deserves to retain the eponymous title. The earlier

description of the vasculature at the base of the brain was fixated on a nonexistent structure, at least not in humans, named the rete mirabile. The more scientific study of the blood supply to the brain took place during the Renaissance period, which culminated in the work of Thomas Willis in the 17th century.”
“OBJECTIVE: Patients with intracranial aneurysms, both ruptured and unruptured, are frequently eligible for both open surgery (“”clipping”") selleck chemicals llc and endovascular repair (“”coiling”"). Although results of randomized trials have informed this decision, the actual choice of clipping or coiling for individual patients remains complex. At the 2007 Congress of Neurological

Surgeons (CNS) Annual Meeting, a novel active learning process called Integrated Medical Learning (IML) was applied to education about this critical treatment choice.

METHODS: CNS members received an electronically distributed premeeting survey and educational materials about the clipping versus coiling decision and related topics. At the Annual Meeting, participants used handheld devices to choose clipping or coiling for treatment AZD5153 nmr of individual aneurysms, both before and after expert opinion presentations. After the meeting, members who had answered premeeting surveys received a follow-up questionnaire.

RESULTS: In the premeeting poll, respondents with self-described specialties of “”vascular,”" Cerebrovascular Section members, surgeons with active cerebrovascular practices, and surgeons in practice for less than 20 years had higher levels of baseline knowledge of cerebrovascular literature (P < .03). Surgeons’ clinical volumes of clipping and coiling strongly influenced their vote for clipping or coiling for a hypothetical patient (P < .01). At the meeting, in 6 of 8 cases of ruptured aneurysms the audience was split 75%:25% or closer to “”clinical equipoise”" (50:50 split). Surgeons with vascular specialty, academic surgeons, and residents were more likely to recommend clipping for individual cases (P < .05).

Comments are closed.