In 2023, many VATS authors make outstanding contributions to our journal. Their articles published with us have received very well feedback in the field and stimulate a lot of discussions and new insights among the peers.
Hereby, we would like to highlight some of our outstanding authors who have been making immense efforts in their research fields, with a brief interview of their unique perspective and insightful view as authors.
Outstanding Authors (2023)
Armin Kiankhooy, Smidt Heart Institute Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, USA
Naoko Ose, Osaka University, Japan
Jon O. Wee, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, USA
Federico Tacconi, Tor Vergata University Hospital, Italy
Lye-Yeng Wong, Stanford Hospital, USA
Hasan Batirel, Biruni University, Turkey
Stella Martínez, El Bosque University, Colombia
Rahul Nayak, London Health Sciences Centre, Canada
Outstanding Author
Armin Kiankhooy
Dr. Armin Kiankhooy, MD, is faculty at the Smidt Heart Institute Cedars-Sinai Medical Center and cardiac surgeon at the affiliate Huntington Hospital, USA. He specializes in the surgical treatment of atrial fibrillation with minimally invasive off-pump thoracoscopic approaches. His research interests are in the areas of minimally invasive surgical ablation and left atrial appendage management. He most recently published a retrospective cohort observational study evaluating the safety and effectiveness of off-pump surgical ablation in patients with prior CABG. Future research projects are focused on effective and safe non-atriotomy approaches to successfully treat atrial fibrillation. Connect with Dr. Kiankhooy on Twitter @armin_kiankhooy.
Academic writing is crucial, in Dr. Kiankhooy’s opinion, to the advancement of surgical science. He explains, “Writing not only allows us to formulate comprehensive and logical assessments of our work but also reveals the transparency in our surgical outcomes, which is paramount for our patients.”
To ensure one’s writing is critical, Dr. Kiankhooy believes peer review plays an essential tole in doing so. Peers are the arbiters of surgical data and avoid fabricated data and false conclusions.
In addition, Dr. Kiankhooy emphasizes that seeking institutional review board (IRB) approval for research is critical to prevent reckless “experimentation” on vulnerable patient populations. Such procedure also protects patients and their personal data from the public, which is exceedingly important with increasing data breaches.
“My personal motivation for academic writing is simply to share surgical experiences and data that ultimately, I believe, will help us provide improved care for our patients who are suffering from disease,” says Dr. Kiankhooy.
(By Brad Li, Eunice X. Xu)
Naoko Ose
Dr. Naoko Ose is currently an Assistant Professor and Chief of the medical staff of the Department of General Thoracic Surgery at Osaka University Graduate School of Medicine, Japan, and a member of the council of the Japanese Association for Chest Surgery. She is one of the few female general thoracic surgeons in Japan, following completion of her MD degree at Osaka University and residency. Her clinical practice involves performing minimally invasive surgery for not only malignant diseases, such as lung cancer and thymic epithelial tumors, but also benign diseases, such as an extended thymectomy for myasthenia gravis including uniportal thoracoscopic and robotic surgery approaches. Her present research activities are focused on inflammatory thoracic disease, as well as surgical treatment of non-tuberculosis mycobacteria infection or thymic neuroendocrine carcinoma, or evaluation regarding minimally invasive surgery for thoracic diseases.
In Dr. Ose’s view, it is necessary and incumbent upon physicians to share their experiences as information. There is a limit to the amount of experience one can gain on their own. She explains, “My skills as a surgeon will improve if I can make use of other people's experiences as my own, and if I can give that back to myself and my patients. Therefore, I feel that both writing and reading articles are crucial.”
Speaking of how an author can equip oneself with better skills, Dr. Ose thinks it is necessary for one to build a skill set by reading papers from a young age, having opportunities to present at conferences, starting with case reports, and receiving guidance from one’s supervisor without hesitation. Knowledge of statistical analysis is required to some extent, but it would be better if one can consult with experts in the field.
In addition, Dr. Ose believes that Conflict of Interest (COI) disclosure is required for any form of academic writing to ensure its scientific objectivity and to protect the interests of the patients and subjects who are enrolled in the study. It can also provide a source of judgment when a third party interprets the results of the research.
“Academic writing takes a lot of time and effort. To be honest, it is still very hard for me to finish my research articles, but I consider it a responsibility and take it as a challenge,” says Dr. Ose.
(By Brad Li, Eunice X. Xu)
Jon O. Wee
Dr. Jon Wee is the Esophageal Surgery Section Chief and Director of Robotics in the Division of Thoracic Surgery, at Brigham and Women’s Hospital. He specializes in minimally invasive approaches to thoracic diseases. He received his medical degree from Duke University School of Medicine and completed his surgical training at Brigham and Women's Hospital. He pursued cardiothoracic surgery training at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center, obtaining board certifications in surgery and thoracic surgery. With a focus on improving patient outcomes, his clinical and research interests lie in minimally invasive and robotic surgeries like esophagectomy and lobectomy. Additionally, he addresses benign esophageal diseases like gastro-esophageal reflux disease, giant paraesophageal hernias, and diverticulum with procedures like POEM procedures for achalasia. As an Assistant Professor of Surgery at Harvard Medical School and an Associate Program Director, Dr. Wee actively contributes to medical education and research.
From Dr. Wee’s perspective, the main challenge in academic writing is accessing available resources for data gathering, analysis, and production. This involves not just trainees but also statisticians and collaborators from different specialties, making the work more enjoyable yet causing logistical challenges. Securing the necessary support and resources for high-quality work is essential but often difficult to establish.
On how to ensure one’s writing is up-to-date and can give new insights into the field of research, Dr. Wee indicates that being actively involved in both one’s society and local academic environment is important. Collaborating frequently with researchers outside one’s field can lead to novel and insightful research directions. However, keeping up requires discipline in reviewing newly published works and promptly assessing their relevance.
On the other hand, Dr. Wee stresses the importance of Conflict of Interest (COI) disclosure. He points out that the purpose of disclosing COI is to maintain transparency and integrity in scientific publications. Readers and reviewers should be aware of any personal or professional interests that could potentially bias the research. By disclosing COI, the readers can assess the impact of these interests on the research. Moreover, the extent to which a COI can influence research varies based on the nature of the conflict. For example, financial ties to a company whose product is being studied might influence an author to present the product in a more favorable light. However, one should note that not all COIs automatically lead to biased research. Many researchers do manage and mitigate potential conflicts, and their work remains unbiased and valid. It is also these researchers who often have the most insight into company products due to their intimate knowledge and experience with the products. Without their input, new and innovative idea and products may never be developed or made to market. Dr. Wee adds, “I have served as a consultant for Medtronic, Ethicon, Boston Scientific, and Intuitive. I received various forms of financial support for providing insight, evaluations, and consultations. However, I have never had any of these companies review our papers or dictate edits. The companies have provided valuable insight and use of their products.”
Lastly, Dr. Wee shares that his initial reports on minimally invasive esophagectomies were relatively small, but the impact it was having on patients could also be seen. It was the process of research and writing that clarified the impact that he was seeing in practice. “Research writing can be a labor of love or just labor. As much as anything, it requires consistent effort, and the hardest paper to write is often your first. Finding the topic that motivates you and that you love to share is what makes the process enjoyable,” says Dr. Wee.
(By Hailing Lian, Brad Li)
Federico Tacconi
Federico Tacconi is serving as Associate Professor and Thoracic Surgery Consultant at the Tor Vergata University Hospital, Rome, Italy. After obtaining his specialty diploma, he attended higher surgical training at several international centers, including Leuven University Hospital (Belgium) and Bristol Royal Infirmary (UK). Between 2011 and 2022, he passed the United Stated Medical License Examination Step 1-Basic Science and Step 2-Clinical Knowledge. In 2023, he obtained the Fellowship of the European Board of Thoracic Surgery. Dr. Tacconi’s main fields of interest are minimally-invasive approaches, role of systemic inflammation in thoracic oncology and quality improvement in thoracic surgery. He authored and co-authored more than 50 publication in indexed journals, with an H-index of 15.
The way Dr. Tacconi sees it, academic writing is basically a way to reflect all together on what we do, what we should do, what we should not do. There is no scientific community without academic writing, provided that it respect high-quality standards.
In Dr. Tacconi’s opinion, the basic skill of an author is the intellectual honesty. That is, try to remain free from personal views and only rely on what numbers say. The other basic fact is the ability to focus on topics that might be really useful to people.
In addition, Dr. Tacconi emphasizes that following reporting guidelines (e.g. STROBE and TREND) is extremely important, in order to respect basic principles of scientific writing and limit sources of bias. On the other hand, he believes the guidelines should allow a minimal of flexibility, and should also be subjected to re-appraisal and changes, as everything.
“There is no specific motivation for me to do academic writing. It is just a question of passion and attitude. It is better to spend 4 hours doing something you love, than just 5 minutes doing something you dislike,” says Dr. Tacconi.
(by Brad Li, Zhixin Xie)
Lye-Yeng Wong
Lye-Yeng Wong is currently a postdoctoral fellow in the Department of Cardiothoracic Surgery at Stanford Hospital in Palo Alto, California. As the fellow in the Berry & Backhus Clinical Outcomes Lab, she focuses on health services research with the majority of her projects based in thoracic oncology. Her publications on lung and esophageal cancer have been mostly database-driven. However, she has also conducted prospective studies in the realm of lung cancer screening and has pursued projects in benign thoracic pathology such as paraesophageal hernia repairs. Her other career passion is global surgery, for which she is a postdoctoral affiliate of the Stanford Center for Innovation in Global Health and the director of operations of the International Standards and Guidelines working group of the G4 Alliance. Connect with Dr. Wong on Twitter: @LyeYengWongMD.
The way Dr. Wong sees it, the concept of knowledge translation through academic research has greatly advanced medical care overtime. In today’s landscape, surgeons have a crucial role in initiating projects that will drive evidence-based care. Improved technology has enabled the pursuit of multi-institutional and cross-continent collaborations that produce results that affect international recommendations. The success of academic writing relies on the ability to effectively disseminate important findings and publish manuscripts in highly trafficked journals. In surgery, the process of incorporating new evidence into clinical practice is more complex due to the increased invasiveness and risk; thus, quality academic writing holds great weight in continually moving the needle toward better patient outcomes.
In Dr. Wong’s view, an author should be novel, bold, and data-driven but also respectful, ethical, and collaborative. Authors should understand the limitations of their studies and be able to address potential pitfalls with logic and grace.
In addition, Dr. Wong highlights that disclosing Conflicts of Interest (COIs) is important because best practices in research should include methods that are transparent and results that are reproducible no matter the principal investigator. Multi-institutional studies are essential for many reasons, and one reason is that including numerous heterogenous surgeons in the research process will minimize effects of COIs that may be present among individual researchers.
“Scientific progress happens slowly, and patience is one of the most important pillars of a successful research career. Although a certain amount of time lag in the research process is necessary to vet new interventions and ensure safety and efficacy, optimizing unnecessary delays is beneficial to individual physicians and policymakers alike, as it could lead to quicker clinical impact and improved cost effectiveness in the public health sector,” says Dr. Wong.
(by Brad Li, Zhixin Xie)
Hasan Batirel
Hasan Fevzi Batirel serves at the Biruni University Faculty of Medicine, Istanbul, Turkey. He graduated from Marmara University School of Medicine in Istanbul, Turkey, in 1994 and completed his residency in 1999. He completed a clinical fellowship in the Division of Thoracic Surgery, Brigham and Women’s Hospital, USA, in 2001. He advanced in his career and became a professor in 2010. He is currently the Secretary General of European Society of Thoracic Surgeons and works at Memorial Hospitals in Istanbul. His research has focused on minimally invasive thoracic surgery, mesothelioma and esophageal surgery. His team has published several papers on the surgical treatment of mesothelioma and also pioneered minimally invasive esophagectomy in Turkey. Their technique and results of uniportal VATS esophagectomy has been published in different journals. He is now focused on VATS and complex reconstruction in esophageal pathologies and on open/VATS approach in patients with lung cancer after chemoimmunotherapy. Learn more about Dr. Batirel here, and connect with him on Facebook, Instagram and LinkedIn.
In Dr. Batirel’s opinion, academic writing is the most important and indispensable part of academic life. To write a paper or report a study shows the important abilities of a scientific person. A paper is the result of several steps. A hypothesis/new idea is generated, a study is designed and carried out, results are analyzed and critically evaluated, and then all of those are summarized in a paper. A good paper needs abstracting skills, sorting out, digging important data, and finally gathering those in such a way that it is easily readable and understandable. Academic writing is the main highway of interaction between colleagues, and an excellent paper with impressive results would affect colleagues for decades to come.
In the current world of so many journals and methods of communication, it may seem easy to publish. Even generating a new paper can be very easy using the new artificial intelligence tools. However, with so much information coming from all directions, Dr. Batirel points out that differentiating important and negligible ones becomes critical. This way of thinking is introduced by his mentor. In his own experience and fellowship training, he used to do reviews for many journals that he would evaluate together with his mentor. It was at that time that he realized to appreciate the qualities of a study and its clinical/scientific impact. Becoming a good reviewer usually ensures a good writer.
“I have always loved to write, even outside of the scientific topics. It is an inherent trait. I find it a very relaxing activity that works your mind and brings about a text from your conscience. Writing is so fascinating that through symbols, we can lead to emotions and thoughts in the minds of other people, our colleagues. The excitement of gathering new data and information is also very intriguing, and constructing a paper from those is the final product to be presented to the scientific community,” says Dr. Batirel.
(by Brad Li, Alisa Lu)
Stella Martínez
Dr. Stella Martínez is a thoracic surgeon who completed her training at the National Cancer Institute – Universidad El Bosque, Bogotá, Colombia, in 1995. She spent 9 months in the thoracic clinic at Karolinska Hospital in Stockholm, Sweden, in 1994 as part of her training. She is also a specialist in general surgery, bioethics and education. After many years as a thoracic surgeon, she completed a virtual master's degree in thoracic oncology in 2019. Dr. Martínez was director of the Specialization program in Thoracic Surgery at El Bosque University (2009-2023), and now she continues as Associate Professor of this program and working at the CTIC - Cancer Research and Treatment Center. She is a member of AATS, ESTS, ATS, ERS, ALAT (Latin American Association of Thoracic Surgery), AIACT (Ibero-American Association of Thoracic Surgery), ASOCOLTORAX (Colombian Association of Thoracic Surgery) and Asoneumocito (Colombian Association of Pulmonologists and Thoracic Surgeons). Most of her recent projects are related to non-small cell lung cancer, staging and outcomes of surgical treatment.
A well-written article, according to Dr. Martínez, is one with truthful information that provides new and practical knowledge that is applicable to one’s professional practice. She believes it is important to keep up to date by reviewing the literature in reliable sources, especially if one is interested in writing about a topic, and to contrast this knowledge with one’s own ideas and practices so that, in addition to the original idea, new aspects emerge that contribute to the advancement of science and the well-being of patients.
“I really enjoy communicating my way of understanding the subject and simplifying it to make it easier to understand, and it is fascinating that in the process, I tend to learn a lot and improve my own understanding,” says Dr. Martínez.
(by Brad Li, Alisa Lu)
Rahul Nayak
Dr. Nayak is the current research and quality improvement director for the division of thoracic surgery at the London Health Sciences Centre and Assistant Professor of Surgery at Western University. His research interests lie in the introduction of technological augmentation in thoracic surgery as well as population-based outcomes research in thoracic diseases. He has presented his work nationally and internationally. He has authored several peer-reviewed publications and 3 book chapters. He currently serves as a reviewer for the Canadian Medical Association Journal, Journal of Thoracic Diseases and World Journal of Surgery. He is a guest editor for the Shanghai Chest Journal. Dr. Nayak has an MSc. in Clinical Trials from the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, University of London. His clinical interests include pleural disease, minimally invasive lung and esophageal surgery, including robotic surgery and endoluminal interventions.
VATS: What role does academic writing play in science?
Dr. Nayak: Academic writing is fundamental to knowledge sharing. There are many different ideas, philosophies and cultural perceptions that influence the care we provide our patients. Academic writing allows clinicians and researchers to speak a common language that promotes more collegial communication and help each other push the boundaries of what we can accomplish. It allows us to objectively challenge the status quo and what is widely believed to be true.
VATS: How to avoid biases in one’s writing?
Dr. Nayak: The key to avoiding bias is to focus on reporting facts and objective data. It is important to have a sound understanding of research methodology to prevent us from reaching too far in our conclusions on presented data. It is also important to come from a place of humility and understand that what you have observed may only be part of the entire picture and that further studies are almost required to validate findings.
VATS: Would you like to say a few words to encourage other academic writers who have been devoting themselves to advancing scientific progress?
Dr. Nayak: It’s important to remember that success usually follows multiple failures and that some of the greatest ideas in history were initially ridiculed before being recognized for their genius. If you have an idea that is outside the box, pursue it with objective endpoints and be prepared to fail. Sometimes, the more people think your idea is crazy, the closer you may be to doing something groundbreaking.
(by Brad Li, Alisa Lu)