Almost M4 and still do not know surgery vs medicine!

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

mctimmy

New Member
7+ Year Member
Joined
May 7, 2014
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
I am almost an M4 and have no idea what I want to do with my life. I have really enjoyed almost every rotation in med school and have not even decided surgery vs medicine, so I'm hoping someone can offer some insight 🙂 Sorry for the wall of text

On surgery, I loved how time flew by so quickly in the OR, and how I and the residents got better at various things (me with closing the incision or doing simple tasks, residents with the actual cases) every day or every time we did it. I have shadowed considerably in several surgical specialties (general surgery, urology, gyn/gyn-onc, ophtho, ENT, neurosurg, ortho) and I liked them all about the same, so I would ultimately choose based on the people in the various fields (I got along with residents/attendings in some better than others). The OR atmosphere is also great: a whole team focused on one goal without too much paperwork or BS getting in the way, you get to teach/learn one-on-one and you are the captain of the team. However, even though I think I would enjoy surgical residency a lot due to the variety of doing different things with different attendings and getting better each time, I am worried that in a surgical specialty I will eventually just do 4-10 operations over and over again. I want to do academics and the reality of academic practice is that you end up that specialized one way or another (usually you get sorta good at one thing, get referred for that one thing, so you get better and better and before you know it you're the expert). They will probably still be somewhat fun as attendings always say but it does not feel like career growth to me--and eventually, if I want to switch and start doing different operations, it may feel like a career step back since I will go from being the best at a few operations that I did to being mediocre at a few new operations that I started doing. I do not see myself as a 50-year old surgeon saying "I'm bored with the operations I rock at so let me start doing a crappy job at something else so it will be more fun." With all this in mind, I usually hear from people that you just have to "survive" surgery residency and then life is great as an attending, which is the opposite of how I feel right now, so I don't know if this concern is a valid one.

On the other hand, I loved medicine. I thought about my patients, thought about the diseases, couldn't wait to share the interesting stuff I saw/thought about/learned with my classmates when I saw them in the halls of the hospital ("I just saw a patient with anti-GBM disease who presented with a cough, now on plasmapharesis, and we're trying to manage his lung disease, kidney disease, and possible underlying liver disease while he gets through this"). I never felt as excited about "cool" surgical things. I liked that medical patients had multiple interacting problems so that on every list there were at least a few patients that the attendings had to scratch their heads over, despite years and years of experience ("Do we stop drug X if it MIGHT be inducing autoimmunity against multiple organs, including the cardiac conduction system, even if drug X is critical for his cardiac function?"). One caveat is that most of my exposure has been in the in-patient setting, whereas I will likely practice as an outpatient specialist in the long run. I was in 2 weeks of cardiology and 1 week of heme/onc clinic, which did not have as many challenging cases as in-patient medicine (a lot of "looks like your cardiac regimen is good and you feel good, see you in 6 months" or "the tumor looks like it is growing so we will start you on the standard chemo regimen"), but there were still 2-4 challenging decisions per day that required serious thought about pathophysiology and/or discussion with your colleague next door like the drug X example from my in-patient experience (these are the discussions I LOVE to have). The other nice thing is that cardiology and heme/onc change faster than surgery, so there are always new papers/drugs/recommendations that come out, and the specialist has to re-consider their patients in the new light to see if they qualify for different treatment (or even if they don't strictly qualify by the trial criteria, do you think the new drug will work for them based on your clinical expertise?). Cardiology and heme/onc are nothing like what they were 30 years ago, while surgery, aside from laparoscopy in the abdomen/pelvis, has not fundamentally changed very much--cataracts, prostates, tongue tumors, aortic valves, and knees are all taken out/replaced in pretty much the same way as always.

Some people have said to me that there are some specialties that "mix" medicine and surgery like ophtho, ENT, and urology, but while those fields all do have medical management options for their patients, the approach, thought process, and pathophysiology is not as medically interesting as the medical specialties. All of these specialties are at their heart surgical subspecialties dealing primarily with surgical or anatomic problems. There are few advances in the fields and little complicated medical decision making, other than whether or not it is worth it to take a very sick patient to surgery in order to possibly improve their lives, which is present in ENT and urology to some extent. Therefore, even though I really enjoyed all three of them, they do not address the dilemma between surgery and medicine for me. I have also considered radiation oncology, where I'm told you "think like a medical doctor, but treat like a surgeon," but only have a little exposure so far, and no elective until later in the fall this year. I considered derm since it is also sort of medical and procedural, but did not enjoy the lack of "real" problems. I have thought about GI and interventional cards. I lumped GI in with surgery since the procedures are cool but the clinic/diseases are not as complex or interesting as the cards and heme/onc stuff I saw. I will not do interventional cards for lifestyle reasons (cannot do Q5 STEMI call when I have a family).

I have already done an advanced surgical subspecialty elective and it just confirmed what the 4 months of surgical stuff I did during the rest of M3 told me, so it did not really help. I have a medicine sub-I late in the fall, but expect to love it just like I loved the 3 month medicine clerkship. Does anyone on SDN have any advice? I am desperate.

TL;DR: Surgery is super fun to do and I love the OR but I'm worried it will get old. Medicine clinic can get boring but there occasional REALLY more interesting things to talk/think about and the fields are more rapidly evolving which keeps it fun.

Members don't see this ad.
 
Last edited:
Similar dilemma with me. Didn't "love" the OR but enjoyed quicker procedures. There's unfortunately a lot of choices. You've probably already thought of the choices that provide a little of both: GS+CC fellowship, Urology/ENT/Optho or Cards, Pulm/CC, GI, Interventional Rads

The way I thought is that many things that once we're treated with surgeries are now being treated with procedures/drugs and that trend will continue. So the more important question will likely be is what organ system are u most interested in?

ENT/Urology/Ophtho irrespective of innovation will control the disease they treat whether medically or surgically. Cards and Pulm control the diseases they treat so you bet they will be controlling more procedures. GI/gen Surg is a toss up.

For myself I was more interested in hemodynamics, acuity and education so I chose medicine with the thought of going into Pulm/cc or cards. Going Cards now with possibility of adding CC boards
 
Please disabuse yourself of the notion that:

1) one choice (over the other) will mean a lifetime of NEW and EXCITING!!!! things to do and discuss. EVERYTHING becomes routine at some point or another.

2) that whatever you choose won't change/mutate/evolve as new technologies become available, as your interests and the needs of your patients change. The surgeon or internist who does the same thing years on end without paying attention to different strategies/treatment modalities is doomed to fail. Will you be a rock star the first time you try a new procedure? Of course not, but that's no reason to think it won't be fun or that you won't get better.

I don't really know any surgeons who started doing "other things" because they were bored. Usually the patient or the field demanded it, or perhaps they started doing other things because litigation/retirement/more time off made it seem more feasible.

3) surgical fields aren't dynamic with active research.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Similar dilemma with me. Didn't "love" the OR but enjoyed quicker procedures. There's unfortunately a lot of choices. You've probably already thought of the choices that provide a little of both: GS+CC fellowship, Urology/ENT/Optho or Cards, Pulm/CC, GI, Interventional Rads

The way I thought is that many things that once we're treated with surgeries are now being treated with procedures/drugs and that trend will continue. So the more important question will likely be is what organ system are u most interested in?
You can't be serious.
 
Please disabuse yourself of the notion that:

1) one choice (over the other) will mean a lifetime of NEW and EXCITING!!!! things to do and discuss. EVERYTHING becomes routine at some point or another.

2) that whatever you choose won't change/mutate/evolve as new technologies become available, as your interests and the needs of your patients change. The surgeon or internist who does the same thing years on end without paying attention to different strategies/treatment modalities is doomed to fail. Will you be a rock star the first time you try a new procedure? Of course not, but that's no reason to think it won't be fun or that you won't get better.

I don't really know any surgeons who started doing "other things" because they were bored. Usually the patient or the field demanded it, or perhaps they started doing other things because litigation/retirement/more time off made it seem more feasible.

3) surgical fields aren't dynamic with active research.

Thanks for the thoughtful reply. To clarify, I don't think that cardiology or heme/onc will mean that everything will always be new and exciting. As I mentioned above, a whole cardiology clinic day of ~20 patients may have 16 routine visits and 3-4 intellectually challenging cases ("Do you want to keep a patient with new-onset ITP and platelets of 15K on Plavix after a stent?" or "Do you anticoagulate someone with a CRVO and heterozygous factor V Leiden mutation?"). I think that would be an absolutely fine ratio for me--even on the medicine rotation, 8 hours of pre-rounding, rounding, and then doing "scut/intern" tasks all day did not bother me given the 2-3 hours of really interesting discussion and thought process that occurred randomly in the afternoons or late evenings.

Similarly, I understand that surgical fields have active research, but usually surgical research moves more slowly than "medical" research. Many surgeons at the hospital I did my third year at do many of the same procedures that they would have done 40 years ago. These procedures work very well, and research in the field has improved outcomes (e.g. laparoscopy for abdominal surgery, or reduced complications after Whipple). Of course a surgeon has to incorporate new research/guidelines into his/her practice. However, the pace is just not the same as in cardiology or heme/onc. In both of those fields, there are drugs now that work on targets that were not known 15 years ago, and there are more drugs developed every year than surgical techniques. This is not a knock on surgery at all--in fact, most surgery works so well that there is frequently little room to improve. For example, why would anyone try to improve cataract surgical technique if the complication rate is so low and the surgery is so effective? The relative effectiveness of surgery over medicine is why many people choose surgery over medicine, so please don't take offense. Also, for me, what I am debating is whether this slower pace of change in the field and in my own career would be offset by the fun of surgery/the OR environment.
 
I will repeat what I wrote in the other thread (where it was claimed that IM attendings were making such statements):

"I was unaware that my medical colleagues had cured all surgical diseases."

He may have meant that some things are now being treated more conservatively (e.g. endovascular vs open vascular, NGT rather than immediate surgery for SBO), but I don't think surgery will ever really decrease in demand. Some fields could be hit by certain specific issues, like urology if prostate cancer stops being screened for or cardiac surgery if endovascular techniques keep up, but I am not thinking about what fields will grow or shrink on the whole--I'm assuming I'll be a busy surgeon if I became a surgeon, otherwise just work part time and play with my kids every day.
 
I don't take offense at all.

I can understand that from a MS POV, it does appear that surgery is stagnant. Many surgeries are being done in the same fashion as they were decades ago because there is little room for improvement. Occasionally something does change and it fails to be superior to the traditional approach -- endoscopic harvest of the axillary lymph nodes or the upper pole of the breast in a mastectomy? Sounds cool but no evidence of increased safety, patient comfort or any benefit (and actually adds time on to the procedure). There are lots of examples of this.

Surgical research is not all about "is X operation better than Y" or technical concerns. Even when it is, it doesn't take decades for results (see recent data on axillary node dissection vs sentinel lymph node biopsies in breast; CEA/CABG vs stenting; limb preservation in sarcoma vs amputation; margin width for melanoma, BCC, breast cancer etc.). There are modifications in management in every surgical field and many surgeons who medically manage their patients (see Transplant, Vascular and Gyn Onc for good examples).
 
He may have meant that some things are now being treated more conservatively (e.g. endovascular vs open vascular, NGT rather than immediate surgery for SBO), but I don't think surgery will ever really decrease in demand. Some fields could be hit by certain specific issues, like urology if prostate cancer stops being screened for or cardiac surgery if endovascular techniques keep up, but I am not thinking about what fields will grow or shrink on the whole--I'm assuming I'll be a busy surgeon if I became a surgeon, otherwise just work part time and play with my kids every day.
No, the claim was that IM attendings were telling students that surgery is a dying field because soon everything will be medically managed, not that there are more percutaneous/MIS options than previously.
 
You can't be serious.

Of course I'm serious. Many diseases that were once treated surgically like peptic ulcer disease, coronary artery disease are no longer, Abscess/biopsies instead of open are done percutaneously by IR, nephrology/IR for dialysis access instead of open procedures previously done by Vascular Surgery, hell even ECMO that required femoral cutdowns now have percutaneous options at my center which are being used. Intracranial Aneurysms treated done percutaneously. Pancreatic cysts are now drained endoscopically at my center. Endoscopic resection of cancers, bronchoscopic resections of luminal tumors, endoscopic/bronchoscopic/IR initiated biopsies instead of open surgical biopsies, need I say more?

The future is going to continue this trend. Interventional Cardiology got another big win with recent studies showing percutaneous Aortic valve replacement for high risk patients at the minimum equivalent if not better than surgical options. And you can bet that the companies are watering at the mouth for repeating the studies with lower risk patients. Electrophysiology basically annihilated the need for Cardiac Surgery with ablation techniques. New Hepatitis C treatments which could eradicate the need for transplants in the future in this population, a flurry of targeted cancer treatments in oncology etc...You would really have to keep your eyes closed not to see this trend.

No one is saying surgery is dying, but many disease are no longer requiring open surgical intervention as they once were say 20 years ago because of better drugs, development of percutaneous/less invasive procedures etc...I don't see how this is controversial. There is a reason why Vascular Surgery resident learn percutaneous procedures now whereas in the past they may have left it to IR.

The whole point of the discussion was that going into a field where you control the disease would be a good idea because you control the medical and interventional management. Even if you go into Surgery, ensure that you go into a field where you aren't necessarily as dependent on referrals from subspecialists ala CT surgeons. If you can offer the trio of medical/percutaneous or endoscopic/surgical therapeutic options, that makes you more valuable in the future such as a current day Urologist or Ophthalmologist. That's all I'm saying.
 
Last edited:
I will repeat what I wrote in the other thread (where it was claimed that IM attendings were making such statements):

"I was unaware that my medical colleagues had cured all surgical diseases."
Something Gen Surgery should place in the consult note next time IM consults them.
 
Last edited:
You are a medicine person. Know how I can tell? No surgical resident is ever going to write posts that long.

In all seriousness, it seems based on your posts that you are most interested in the medical management of complicated patients. Take my analysis for what it's worth: very little. You are the only person who can make this decision.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
I have to agree with southernIM and WS. You say you're interested in surgery, but it doesn't seem like you understand surgical fields much at all. I'll echo a few points:

1- Surgery does not get old. It might for the student/intern who is watching and not actively involved. You might think that it's another gallbladder/appendix/hernia, but for the surgeon doing the case, every gallbladder is a new operation. There is a lot of thought that goes into every step of the operation. Plus, if you're at an academic hospital, teaching the juniors/students will keep it new and exciting.

2- Surgical oncology fields (colorectal/breast/hpb) are always evolving and those surgeons are actively involved in the intellectual discussion (try going to tumor board and see the complex decision making)

3- Interesting discussions you're currently having on medicine rotations become repetitive and as a resident, I imagine it becomes the thing that slows you down and hinders your ability to get your work done.

4- radiation oncologists don't treat like surgeons. Do not confuse procedures with operations. Ultimately, it depends what disease process (organ system) you want to take care of, and what set of skills (and/or knowledge) you are interested in mastering.

5- General surgeons manage most medical problems their patients have peri-op. We have no shame consulting when things get difficult, but usually we are consulting cardiology/neph etc (i.e. anything a general medicine consult could address is usually not worthy of a consult).

6- finally: surgical fields are where you feel like you make an impact that's easy to see early on. You take out an appendix/gallbladder/cancer and the patient is immediately "better". Most medicine patients are admitted to the hospital (seen in clinic) and leave in a relatively unchanged status. You hope that your medical management will have an impact long term.
 
I have to agree with southernIM and WS. You say you're interested in surgery, but it doesn't seem like you understand surgical fields much at all. I'll echo a few points:

1- Surgery does not get old. It might for the student/intern who is watching and not actively involved. You might think that it's another gallbladder/appendix/hernia, but for the surgeon doing the case, every gallbladder is a new operation. There is a lot of thought that goes into every step of the operation. Plus, if you're at an academic hospital, teaching the juniors/students will keep it new and exciting.

2- Surgical oncology fields (colorectal/breast/hpb) are always evolving and those surgeons are actively involved in the intellectual discussion (try going to tumor board and see the complex decision making)

3- Interesting discussions you're currently having on medicine rotations become repetitive and as a resident, I imagine it becomes the thing that slows you down and hinders your ability to get your work done.

4- radiation oncologists don't treat like surgeons. Do not confuse procedures with operations. Ultimately, it depends what disease process (organ system) you want to take care of, and what set of skills (and/or knowledge) you are interested in mastering.

5- General surgeons manage most medical problems their patients have peri-op. We have no shame consulting when things get difficult, but usually we are consulting cardiology/neph etc (i.e. anything a general medicine consult could address is usually not worthy of a consult).

6- finally: surgical fields are where you feel like you make an impact that's easy to see early on. You take out an appendix/gallbladder/cancer and the patient is immediately "better". Most medicine patients are admitted to the hospital (seen in clinic) and leave in a relatively unchanged status. You hope that your medical management will have an impact long term.
Very true, I think the OP is overglamorizing Surgery, rather than seeing how it actually is. Not really surprising as most MS-3s on Surgery rotations do absolutely nothing. Maybe a Surgery Sub-I might help, but I doubt it, when it comes to giving a realistic view.
 
Pediatric interventional cardiology. You get all the cool procedures without STEMI call. Plus much cooler (IMO) anatomy.

I did think about this for a little while but did not enjoy pediatrics at all, even though in theory I liked it more (bigger impact if you cure kids, I like kids, etc.). Also, there are very few pediatric interventionalist jobs out there so even if I was really good at it, I would have to wait for someone to die/retire to get a job, and even then, I might have very little control over where in the country I can go. Some peds cardiologists I talked to say they do 20-30% cards and 70% general pediatrics in order to practice in the location they want, which I would not be happy with.

I have to agree with southernIM and WS. You say you're interested in surgery, but it doesn't seem like you understand surgical fields much at all. I'll echo a few points:

1- Surgery does not get old. It might for the student/intern who is watching and not actively involved. You might think that it's another gallbladder/appendix/hernia, but for the surgeon doing the case, every gallbladder is a new operation. There is a lot of thought that goes into every step of the operation. Plus, if you're at an academic hospital, teaching the juniors/students will keep it new and exciting.

2- Surgical oncology fields (colorectal/breast/hpb) are always evolving and those surgeons are actively involved in the intellectual discussion (try going to tumor board and see the complex decision making)

3- Interesting discussions you're currently having on medicine rotations become repetitive and as a resident, I imagine it becomes the thing that slows you down and hinders your ability to get your work done.

4- radiation oncologists don't treat like surgeons. Do not confuse procedures with operations. Ultimately, it depends what disease process (organ system) you want to take care of, and what set of skills (and/or knowledge) you are interested in mastering.

5- General surgeons manage most medical problems their patients have peri-op. We have no shame consulting when things get difficult, but usually we are consulting cardiology/neph etc (i.e. anything a general medicine consult could address is usually not worthy of a consult).

6- finally: surgical fields are where you feel like you make an impact that's easy to see early on. You take out an appendix/gallbladder/cancer and the patient is immediately "better". Most medicine patients are admitted to the hospital (seen in clinic) and leave in a relatively unchanged status. You hope that your medical management will have an impact long term.

Your first point, is the one that I am most interested in. Can anyone tell me more about how every operation feels new and is still fun? At my stage right now, that is certainly true, but does anyone get bored doing the same few operations over and over again? Or is that not even a possibility? If it doesn't get boring, why would anyone not do surgery if they find it fun (like I do)?

I have already decided no on general surgery--although I will admit this is the one area of surgery (besides transplant and gyn onc, which I have also ruled out based on lifestyle reasons) where the surgeons do a lot of medical management of complicated cases.

While I agree that the interesting discussions can slow residents down from doing their work on the floor, most of my life will be spent as an attending, and the presence of these discussions is a marker for the underlying intellectual challenges with medical patients--challenges that I will have to make decisions about (not with lengthy discussions necessarily, but still with some serious thinking). Maybe I am wrong about this, but the minute-to-minute or hour-to-hour intra-operative decision-making does not seem as intellectually challenging (e.g. we should use bioprosthetic mesh rather than synthetic since this is a contaminated wound).

In terms of change/evolution, maybe I should clarify. I know there is research in surgical fields (e.g. role for SNLB after primary excision of melanoma--when to do it etc.). This research is helpful to surgeons but does not excite me the same way that novel drugs with new mechanisms of action do. Therefore, my view is that the pace of major change is faster in medical fields than in surgical fields. On the other hand, while it seems to me the fields move faster in medicine, the care of individual patients does obviously not move as fast, which is a negative of medicine.
 
Very true, I think the OP is overglamorizing Surgery, rather than seeing how it actually is. Not really surprising as most MS-3s on Surgery rotations do absolutely nothing. Maybe a Surgery Sub-I might help, but I doubt it, when it comes to giving a realistic view.

What do you mean overglamorizing surgery rather than seeing how it actually is? Meaning that I think it is more fun than it actually is, or me thinking it might get old is not founded? I have done one surgery subspecialty sub I by deferring one month of third year but enjoyed it as much as the surgery clerkship. I got to do a lot and found that to be really fun, but anyone would in the same shoes. It did not help me answer any of these questions, which more have to do with long-term (decades) issues.
 
In terms of change/evolution, maybe I should clarify. I know there is research in surgical fields (e.g. role for SNLB after primary excision of melanoma--when to do it etc.). This research is helpful to surgeons but does not excite me the same way that novel drugs with new mechanisms of action do. Therefore, my view is that the pace of major change is faster in medical fields than in surgical fields. On the other hand, while it seems to me the fields move faster in medicine, the care of individual patients does obviously not move as fast, which is a negative of medicine.

Again...this shows that you have a bizarre lack of awareness of the scope of research going on in surgical fields. I say bizarre since I would think a student considering a surgical career would at least have started looking at the primary literature.

Clinical decision making/algorithm stuff like the indications for sentinel node biopsy is a very tiny slice of the research world.
 
In terms of change/evolution, maybe I should clarify. I know there is research in surgical fields (e.g. role for SNLB after primary excision of melanoma--when to do it etc.). This research is helpful to surgeons but does not excite me the same way that novel drugs with new mechanisms of action do. Therefore, my view is that the pace of major change is faster in medical fields than in surgical fields. On the other hand, while it seems to me the fields move faster in medicine, the care of individual patients does obviously not move as fast, which is a negative of medicine.
This right there tells me the surgery pathway is not for you. You sound like someone interested in an IM subspecialty, if not Anesthesia.
 
You could consider dermpath. It's a combination of many things you like. You should go over to the derm forums where we are discussing it. You also have the option of cosmetics. We also discussed how Mohs may be taken over by plastics but still you should join the debate over on the derm forum.
 
...decision-making does not seem as intellectually challenging (e.g. we should use bioprosthetic mesh rather than synthetic since this is a contaminated wound).

.

LOL...most clinical decision making is not made in the OR with the patient on table but rather in the office/Tumor Board etc.

At any rate, I do the same thing everyday with a pretty narrow focus. I'm never bored. Despite the fact that the diagnoses are the same, every patient is different, every disease presentation and manifestation is different.
 
First, LOL at that OP wall of text. No surgeon/surgery program/surgery interview gonna have time for your vacillating dilly dally.

Second, "I would like to see the day when somebody would be appointed surgeon somewhere who had no hands, for the operative part is the least part of the work." Harvey Cushing

I think it's worth considering this quote by ...uhhh ...probably the most famous surgeon of ever. I may be biased, but all physicians are physicians -- only some physicians are surgeons. Surgeons aren't afraid to treat patients conservatively, the OR is just the cherry on top for being a a degree above doctor.
 
I think it's worth considering this quote by ...uhhh ...probably the most famous surgeon of ever. I may be biased, but all physicians are physicians -- only some physicians are surgeons. Surgeons aren't afraid to treat patients conservatively, the OR is just the cherry on top for being a a degree above doctor.

No bias detected.
 
I believe in the US you have to make a clear-cut choice between a surgical or IM internship year which makes the decision even harder. My internship year was structured in a way that we did 2 month rotations so I got a close feel of surgery and IM with their opposing philosophies and patient population. I think if you are an M4 and still have the chance to do electives to add a dabble of each in different kinds of settings (OR, hospitalist and outpatient) to get a more global feel. In the worst of cases you can do two residencies in the US if you have the stamina to be a resident for 7 years. Maybe there are a few surg/IM combined programs?
Seriously, why do you give advice, which is quite wrong I might add, without qualifying that you are a doctor in Mexico?

I mean do 2 residencies? Really? You think Medicare is really going to pay for that? You think as an attending he'll be both a board certified surgeon and board certified IM doctor?
 
I've met one BC'd cardiothoracic surgeon/cardiologist

he's intense
 
First, LOL at that OP wall of text. No surgeon/surgery program/surgery interview gonna have time for your vacillating dilly dally.

Second, "I would like to see the day when somebody would be appointed surgeon somewhere who had no hands, for the operative part is the least part of the work." Harvey Cushing

I think it's worth considering this quote by ...uhhh ...probably the most famous surgeon of ever. I may be biased, but all physicians are physicians -- only some physicians are surgeons. Surgeons aren't afraid to treat patients conservatively, the OR is just the cherry on top for being a a degree above doctor.

A degree above a doctor?? Lol. Tool
 
Seriously, why do you give advice, which is quite wrong I might add, without qualifying that you are a doctor in Mexico?

I mean do 2 residencies? Really? You think Medicare is really going to pay for that? You think as an attending he'll be both a board certified surgeon and board certified IM doctor?

I agree it's an exception that proves the rule and I'm not really sure about his timing/reasons but there's a board certified CT surgeon/IM boarded doctor around here. I think he did the IM program later on in his career.
 
I agree it's an exception that proves the rule and I'm not really sure about his timing/reasons but there's a board certified CT surgeon/IM boarded doctor around here. I think he did the IM program later on in his career.
Yes, but to plan to do Gen Surgery and IM residencies as an MS-4, is quite different. The person you're talking about had a change of heart, and I'm sure it wasn't easy to maneuver.
 
I have to agree with southernIM and WS. You say you're interested in surgery, but it doesn't seem like you understand surgical fields much at all. I'll echo a few points:

1- Surgery does not get old. It might for the student/intern who is watching and not actively involved. You might think that it's another gallbladder/appendix/hernia, but for the surgeon doing the case, every gallbladder is a new operation. There is a lot of thought that goes into every step of the operation. Plus, if you're at an academic hospital, teaching the juniors/students will keep it new and exciting.

2- Surgical oncology fields (colorectal/breast/hpb) are always evolving and those surgeons are actively involved in the intellectual discussion (try going to tumor board and see the complex decision making)

3- Interesting discussions you're currently having on medicine rotations become repetitive and as a resident, I imagine it becomes the thing that slows you down and hinders your ability to get your work done.

4- radiation oncologists don't treat like surgeons. Do not confuse procedures with operations. Ultimately, it depends what disease process (organ system) you want to take care of, and what set of skills (and/or knowledge) you are interested in mastering.

5- General surgeons manage most medical problems their patients have peri-op. We have no shame consulting when things get difficult, but usually we are consulting cardiology/neph etc (i.e. anything a general medicine consult could address is usually not worthy of a consult).

6- finally: surgical fields are where you feel like you make an impact that's easy to see early on. You take out an appendix/gallbladder/cancer and the patient is immediately "better". Most medicine patients are admitted to the hospital (seen in clinic) and leave in a relatively unchanged status. You hope that your medical management will have an impact long term.
 
Great post. I hope more med students read this, and appreciate how fulfilling surgery can.
 
If you have to ask about being a surgeon, then you should not be a surgeon......from one of my professors. Good luck.

I have noticed that at my school, there were some people who came in wanting to do surgery that found it wasn't for them.

There were none that went from medical -> surgical. I wonder if everyone else's experience is the same.
 
I have noticed that at my school, there were some people who came in wanting to do surgery that found it wasn't for them.

There were none that went from medical -> surgical. I wonder if everyone else's experience is the same.
I was one.

We had several MS-1 classmates who were going to be surgeons; most changed their mind for one reason or another. I found that I enjoyed surgery much more than medicine. I'm not the only one as I've had students do the same but I admit, its less common than the other route.
 
I have noticed that at my school, there were some people who came in wanting to do surgery that found it wasn't for them.

There were none that went from medical -> surgical. I wonder if everyone else's experience is the same.
Ask any surgery resident who did their MS-3 rotation in Internal Medicine. I know many whose perception of IM (along with its subspecialties) was shattered on that rotation, and decided that surgery was something that fit their personalities more. Rounding forever can do that to you.
 
I have noticed that at my school, there were some people who came in wanting to do surgery that found it wasn't for them.

There were none that went from medical -> surgical. I wonder if everyone else's experience is the same.

One of my classmates swore up until third year that she was going to do IM. After we did surgical subspecialties, she decided she liked orthopaedics, and is now matched into Ortho. We also had a girl who was going to do FM, and was still debating between GS and FM up until September. She's doing GS. We had another girl who loved loved peds (she was originally in our primary care track in med school), but ultimately decided she wanted to do Peds Surg more, so she's doing GS in a couple months.

So lots of people who went more medicine--> surgery, and not so many that went the other way around.
 
Very true, I think the OP is overglamorizing Surgery, rather than seeing how it actually is. Not really surprising as most MS-3s on Surgery rotations do absolutely nothing. Maybe a Surgery Sub-I might help, but I doubt it, when it comes to giving a realistic view.

dude i was an asset to my surgical team. i did not cut one suture knot, not one!
 
dude i was an asset to my surgical team. i did not cut one suture knot, not one!
cookie.gif


The problem is you cut them too short and other times you cut them too long, w/o getting the perfect length.
 
these surg versus medicine are a classic I never get tired of.
 
I will eventually just do 4-10 operations over and over again

4-10 kinds of operations and its variations is plenty. And after sometime, unless you are some kind of academic god (and thus you will spend more time talking about your mad skills than performing them), you will not want the stress of having to master a load of different procedures.
 
these surg versus medicine are a classic I never get tired of.

I've figured out surgery vs medicine. I have a hard time believing people here haven't found what makes the two different.
Medicine - write novels and be a telemarketer (jk)
Surgery - Cliff Notes and Cut

I had no interest in surgery before I started surgery (like... 100% certain). But that changed in 2 months. Despite some of the bad (mostly administration), I've found my niche. It has a lot to do with the type of people that do it, the people you work in the OR with you and your tolerance for being told you're wrong. Medicine just didn't do it for me.

There's truth to the personality thing. There's a certain type of person that does medicine and a certain type of person that does surgery. If you haven't figured out which is you, then you need to ask other people. When I told my friends/classmates how much I loved surgery and wanted to do it they all responded "Yeah... we honestly knew it from the beginning based on your personality". There's no magic to it.

Lastly - to the comment about no real advancements in surgery, you really need to talk with surgeons more.
Example - Congenital Heart Diseases were once thought to be things you did for kids but recent papers are showing that people are living longer and we're seeing more involvement in adult cases of congenital heart diseases. Procedures using cool technologies (look up cavopulmonary assist) once used in kids have the potential of being seen in adults.

There are definitely changes that aren't just "laparoscopic".

And the "complexities" of medicine are realllllly rare. And they involve a lot of time/effort. Don't be fooled by the "complexity" of medicine. It's a fugazi:


But I'm not a resident. So, I guess my opinion isn't the strongest. I just know that medicine is used in surgery and that surgery isn't dying out or not using cool technology. You've just had too short of time to see it all.
 
Top