Presenting Lars-Eirik and his thesis

Ever since the beginning of medical school, I have been fascinated by the field of pathology. So much of our understanding of medicine comes from the study of structures we cannot see with the naked eye, and we keep learning more from this hidden world by the day. It was therefore an easy choice to have my thesis be within this field. 

My thesis, titled "Finding the right fit: A comparison of arteriosclerosis scoring systems in non-neoplastic kidney biopsies", seeks to improve our understanding of how best to assess degrees of arteriosclerosis in kidney arteries. 

What is the background of my thesis, and why does the study matter? 

There are currently numerous different methods used by pathologists to assess the grade of arteriosclerosis in the kidneys. A correct evaluation of the status is crucial, because vascular changes affect the blood supply to the kidney structures and ultimately the kidney function. An important question is therefore whether there are methods which are more accurate, more reliable, and more cost-effective, and so forth. 

Some of the questions the study addresses are: In the case of arteriosclerosis, should the scoring person look at the luminal narrowing, or the relationship between the medial and intimal layers, or perhaps compare the entire wall thickness to the luminal diameter? Does it make a difference if the scoring person makes precise measurements, or is "eye-balling" sufficient? Do different methods yield the same numerical score? Do some yield very different scores? Many artery biopsies are cut at weird angles rather than the perfect cross-sections we see in the textbooks. How do the systems compare in assessing arteries in such biopsies? 

It is hard to come to any definitive conclusions on these specific questions, but we attempt to compare the different scoring systems and discuss possible strengths and weaknesses of each. In short, we have methodologically done this by comparing the results of different scoring persons of varying medical background using different scoring systems grading or quantifying arteriosclerosis in kidney biopsies. 

It has been a great learning experience doing this study. The most challenging part has probably been the experimental phase, since it was difficult to train my eyes to orientate myself within arteries that had been cut at various different angles and orientations. The most enjoyable part was certainly collecting all the data and seeing the first results! 

I am very excited to conclude the study and share what we have found. Hopefully, it will offer nephropathologists and other researchers valuable information about the use of the scoring systems we have compared. 

I would like to thank my advisors, Hrafn Weishaupt, Ph.D., and Sabine Leh, M.D., Ph.D., for their guidance and advice during this study.