Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Future perspectives for surgical research in Germany

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Langenbeck's Archives of Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

An Erratum to this article was published on 16 May 2014

Abstract

Background

During the last two decades, the complexity of surgical patient care has increased dramatically. Nonetheless, there is substantial need to improve the quality of surgical research in Germany.

Purpose

Herein, we present the current concepts of the German Society of Surgery, the Section of Surgical Research, the Study Center of the German Surgical Society, and the German Surgical Trial Network (CHIR-Net) and their perspectives to promote young surgeons for a career in academic surgery and to improve the quality of surgical research in experimental studies as well as in clinical trials. The concepts include also education, teaching, and mentoring in order to strengthen the research profile of surgical departments and surgical research institutes.

Conclusions

We feel that realization of these concepts should guarantee the survival of the surgeon-scientist across all surgical subspecialties, increase the attractiveness of academic positions in surgery, and promote translational research from bench to bedside with a benefit for patient care.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure
Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Gittes GK (2006) The surgeon-scientist in a new biomedical research era. Surgery 140:123–131

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Menger MD, Schilling MK, Schäfers HJ, Pohlemann T, Laschke MW (2012) How to ensure the survival of the surgeon-scientist? The Homburg Program. Langenbecks Arch Surg 397:619–622

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Vollmar B (2012) Research as attractiveness parameter for young surgeons. Chirurg 83:319–322

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Wilhelm MJ, Schmidt C, Scheld HH (2004) The place of research and the role of academic surgeons in cardiac surgery. Thorac Cardiovasc Surg 52:117–123

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Schneider M, Werner J, Weitz J, Büchler MW (2010) Organization of clinical research: in general and visceral surgery. Chirurg 81:341–346

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Brendel W (1983) Experimentelle Chirurgie. In: Schreiber HW, Carstensen G (eds) Chirurgie im Wandel der Zeit 1945-1983. Springer, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  7. Moore FD (1975) What is surgical research? Eur Surg Res 5:245–258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Meßmer K (1990) Perspektiven der experimentellen Chirurgie. Chirurg 61:248–250

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Knebel P, Kühn S, Ulrich AB, Büchler MW, Diener MK (2012) The Study Centre of the German Surgical Society: current trials and results. Langenbecks Arch Surg 397:611–618

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Diener MK, Simon T, Büchler MW, Seiler CM (2012) Surgical evaluation and knowledge transfer—methods of clinical research in surgery. Langenbecks Arch Surg 397:1193–1199

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Rekrutierende multizentrische chirurgische Studien in Deutschland. http://static.springer.com/sgw/documents/491998/application/pdf/Klinische_Studien_1_2014.pdf

  12. Schulz KF, Altman DG, Moher D, CONSORT Group (2010) CONSORT 2010 statement: updated guidelines for reporting parallel group randomized trials. Ann Intern Med 152:726–732

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Diener MK, Seiler CM, Antes G (2007) Systematic reviews and meta-analyses in surgery. Chirurg 78:938–944

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Ioannidis JP, Greenland S, Hlatky MA, Khoury MJ, Macleod MR, Moher D et al (2014) Increasing value and reducing waste in research design, conduct, and analysis. Lancet 383:166–175

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Gluud C, Nikolova D (2007) Likely country of origin in publications on randomised controlled trials and controlled clinical trials during the last 60 years. Trials 8:7

    Article  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Wente MN, Seiler CM, Uhl W, Buchler MW (2003) Perspectives of evidence-based surgery. Dig Surg 20:263–269

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Solomon MJ, Laxamana A, Devore L, McLeod RS (1994) Randomized controlled trials in surgery. Surgery 115:707–712

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Hall JC, Mills B, Nguyen H, Hall JL (1996) Methodologic standards in surgical trials. Surgery 119:466–472

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Doerr-Harim C, Bruckner T, Diener MK, Knebel P (2014) Insights of surgical trials—challenges and possible solutions. Langenbecks Arch Surg. 2014 Jan 18. doi:10.1007/s00423-013-1155-5

  20. Seiler CM, Bruckner T, Diener MK, Papyan A, Golcher H, Seidlmayer C et al (2009) Interrupted or continuous slowly absorbable sutures for closure of primary elective midline abdominal incisions: a multicenter randomized trial (INSECT: ISRCTN24023541). Ann Surg 249:576–582

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Kenngott HG, Clemens G, Gondan M, Senft J, Diener MK, Rudofsky G et al (2013) DiaSurg 2 trial—surgical vs. medical treatment of insulin-dependent type 2 diabetes mellitus in patients with a body mass index between 26 and 35 kg/m2: study protocol of a randomized controlled multicenter trial-DRKS00004550. Trials 14:183

    Article  CAS  PubMed Central  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Conflicts of interest

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. The Study Center of the German Surgical Society, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany

    Markus K. Diener

  2. Department of General, Visceral and Transplantation Surgery, University of Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany

    Markus K. Diener

  3. Institute for Clinical & Experimental Surgery, Saarland University, 66421, Homburg/Saar, Germany

    Michael D. Menger

  4. Department of General and Visceral Surgery, Diakoniekrankenhaus Henriettenstiftung gGmbH, Hannover, Germany

    Joachim Jähne

  5. Office of Science & Research, German Surgical Society (DGCH), Berlin, Germany

    Hans-Detlev Saeger

  6. Department of General, Thoracic, Vascular and Transplantation Surgery, University of Rostock, Rostock, Germany

    Ernst Klar

Authors
  1. Markus K. Diener
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michael D. Menger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Joachim Jähne
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Hans-Detlev Saeger
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Ernst Klar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Michael D. Menger.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Diener, M.K., Menger, M.D., Jähne, J. et al. Future perspectives for surgical research in Germany. Langenbecks Arch Surg 399, 253–262 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-014-1178-6

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00423-014-1178-6

Keywords

Search

Navigation