What is your opinion on open-access publications and what has been your experience in publishing this way?

de Bruijn: I certainly think that there should be more open-access publications. They stimulate evidence-based medicine, promote good clinical practice and, in our case, contribute to the growth and exposure of interventional radiology. I have published open-access in the past, as the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam has agreements with multiple journals. I believe that open-access helps information reach a greater audience and make the biggest impact possible.

What is important to your institute – impact factor or citation index? What is your view?

de Bruijn: In my institution, impact factor is considered the most important scientific
parameter. However, in my opinion, impact factor is void because it results in a publication bias. I believe that using a citation index would be a better solution, since it reflects what physicians find most important in daily practice.

Published in June 2019, this paper evaluates the implementation of uterine artery
embolisation for symptomatic uterine fibroids in the Netherlands, as well as looking into gynaecologists’ preferences and other factors that can influence the speed of implementation.

Do you think there are currently enough easily accessible interventional radiology publication possibilities for case reports, short communications, technical notes, etc.?

Najafi: I believe that the additional possibility of publishing in CVIR Endovascular
is certainly enhancing the options of our scientific community. Interventional radiology is a specialty that is developing incredibly quickly and there are so many different aspects that have not yet been investigated. With the growth of our specialty there will automatically be demand for further publishing options, underlining the importance of having possibilities to publish early findings (such as our observation with the Nellix stent graft) outside of prospective study settings.

At your institution, how important is impact factor for publishing?

Najafi: At our institute, the primary goal is to do clinical research about new developments that benefit our patients and we like to share these insights in journals
that are read frequently by CIRSE members. The impact factor is certainly still an
important parameter that is used to assess scientific papers, and it is something that is always on one’s mind when choosing the appropriate journal for publication. However, I very much believe it should not be the only criterion.

Young scientists find it more and more difficult to get their first papers
published. What would be your advice for them?

Najafi: If we want to keep up the growth in IR, we need to provide researchers with
platforms to publish their work. I think it is important, now more than ever, to closely
work with experienced and accomplished peers. A study needs to be carefully evaluated and planned from the beginning to avoid pitfalls further down the road that can hinder possible publication.

Arash Najafi and his co-authors shared their experience with the Nellix stent graft in their paper which was published in April 2019. They focus on complications that necessitated secondary interventions, including proximal angulation, limb separation, caudal migration and type Ia endoleak. The paper provides possible endovascular salvage options that worked well for their patients.

Why did you choose CVIR Endovascular to publish this case report?

Tullius: When I was attempting to publish our case report, I struggled to find an appropriate place to publish. Multiple journals offered to publish the case report as a much briefer ‘Letter to the Editor’; however, I believed that this was a case that needed more exposure, with detailed explanation and analysis. I was encouraged to submit to CVIR Endovascular, which has provided a wonderful avenue for publication.

Have you had any experience of open access publishing before? Would you do it again?

Tullius: This was my first experience with open access. The submission website was very userfriendly and the entire process was seamless. The review of the article was prompt and the comments from the reviewers helped to improve the content of the manuscript.

Impact factor is still an important scientific parameter in many institutions, although other parameters like citation index are becoming more important. How is this in your institution and what is your opinion about this?

Tullius: While impact factor is an important component when deciding where to publish, there are many other considerations. In my mind, the goal of publishing is to share your work with other like-minded individuals and open-access journals can give great exposure to your work while improving citation index.

Do you think CVIR Endovascular can play a role in helping young scientists publish their first papers?

Tullius: CVIR Endovascular will be instrumental for many young scientists and physicians. Experiencing and learning from the publishing process of your first paper is a rite of passage and many journals no longer even consider valuable articles like case reports and technical notes. I would definitely recommend CVIR Endovascular to my colleagues who want exposure for their manuscript.

This case report, which was published in April 2019, documents a novel case of intervention following right hepatic resection for metastatic lesion. The remnant left hepatic lobe vacated the space left by the right hepatic lobe and subsequently induced torsion and complete thrombosis of the IVC. Using completely endovascular treatment, an Angiovac suction thombectomy device and stenting created sustained patency of the IVC.