Giulio Cesare Aranzio (Arantius) (1530-89) in the pageant of anatomy and surgery

Giulio Cesare Aranzio in Italian (Julius Caesar Arantius in Latin) has not received full acclaim for his achievements in the field of anatomy and surgery that remain unknown to most physicians. His anatomical books Observationes Anatomicas, and De Humano Foetu Opusculum and surgical books De Tumoribus Secundum Locos Affectos and Hippocratis librum de vulneribus capitis commentarius brevis printed in Latin and additional existing literature on Aranzio from medical history books and journals were analysed extensively. Aranzio became Professor of Anatomy and Surgery at the University of Bologna in 1556. He established anatomy as a distinguished branch of medicine for the first time in medical history. Aranzio combined anatomy with a description of pathological processes. He discovered the 'Nodules of Aranzio' in the semilunar valves of the heart. He gave the first description of the superior levator palpebral and the coracobrachialis muscles. Aranzio wrote on surgical techniques for a wide spectrum of conditions that range from hydrocephalus, nasal polyp, goitre and tumours to phimosis, ascites, haemorrhoids, anal abscess and fistulae, and much more. Aranzio had an extensive knowledge in surgery and anatomy based in part on the ancient Greek and his contemporaries in the 16th century but essentially on his personal experience and practice.

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.