What to expect when you're expecting a hepatopancreatobiliary surgeon: self-reported experiences of HPB surgeons from different training pathways

BackgroundHepatopancreatobiliary (HPB) surgery fellowship training has multiple paths. Prospective trainees and employers must understand the differences between training pathways. This study examines self-reported fellowship experiences and current scope of practice across three pathways.MethodsAn online survey was disseminated to 654 surgeons. These included active Americas Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Association (AHPBA) members and recent graduates of HPB, transplant–HPB and HPB–heavy surgical oncology fellowships.ResultsA total of 416 (64%) surgeons responded. Most respondents were male (89%) and most were practising in an academic setting (83%). 290 (70%) respondents underwent formal fellowship training. Although fellowship experiences varied, current practice was largely similar. Minimally invasive surgery (MIS) and ultrasound were the most commonly identified areas of training deficiencies and were, respectively, cited as such by 47% and 34% of HPB-, 49% and 50% of transplant-, and 52% and 25% of surgical oncology-trained respondents. Non-HPB cases performed in current practice included gastrointestinal (GI) and general surgery cases (56% and 49%, respectively) for HPB-trained respondents, transplant and general surgery cases (87% and 21%, respectively) for transplant-trained respondents, and GI surgery and non-HPB surgical oncology cases (70% and 28%, respectively) for surgical oncology-trained respondents.ConclusionsFellowship training in HPB surgery varies by training pathway. Training in MIS and ultrasound is deficient in each pathway. The ultimate scope of non-transplant HPB practice appears similar across training pathways. Thus, training pathway choice is best guided by the training experience desired and non-HPB components of anticipated practice.     

Glycopolymer Code: Programming Synthetic Macromolecules for Biological Targeting

Targeting in a cellular level is still one of the major challenges in biomedical treatments. However, new synthetic and analytical techniques now allow the development of precisely prepared macromolecules. Thus, glycopolymer chains are reported to be prepared with controlled length, monomer sequences, as well as chain‐folded structures. A high level of complexity in synthetic macromolecules also allows increased selectivity in targeting, which is a key factor in biomedical applications.     

Formulation and in Vitro-in Vivo Evaluation of Sustained-Release Lithium Carbonate Tablets

The release of lithium carbonate incorporated into polymethylmethacrylate, poly vinyl chloride, hy-drogenated vegetable oil, and carbomer matrix tablets was studied in vitro. The formulation containing 10% carbomer showed a sustained-release profile comparable to that of a standard, commercially available, sustained-release preparation containing 400 mg lithium carbonate embedded in a composite material. In vivo the newly formulated and standard sustained-release lithium carbonate tablets were compared to an oral solution and conventional lithium carbonate tablets in 12 healthy subjects. These crossover studies showed that the sustained-release tablets produced a flatter serum concentration curve than the oral solution and conventional tablet, without loss of total bioavailability.