Best general surgery programs for fellowships

[UofM85]

This has been discussed a little in other threads, but there are a lot of details missing. I was wondering, what are some residency programs that have done a good job a putting their residents in good fellowships? I am specifically wondering about surgical oncology, but what about other fellowships as well? I know the top 10 NIH funded programs do a good job, but what about programs beyond Johns Hopkins and MGH?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[45408]

What's a good fellowship? What's a bad fellowship?

If you want a research-oriented fellowship or field, then you should probably do your residency at a program that is research-oriented.

 

[Black Surgeon]

I know the top 10 NIH funded programs do a good job, but what about programs beyond Johns Hopkins and MGH?

Try the next 10 top funded programs, and after those, the next ten. Irrespective of what they tell you, the name matters.

This has been discussed a little in other threads, but there are a lot of details missing. I was wondering, what are some residency programs that have done a good job a putting their residents in good fellowships? I am specifically wondering about surgical oncology, but what about other fellowships as well?

You want an academic GS program with two years of designated research and preferably a surg onc fellowship program. It is a well known fact that most programs have a predilection for their own trainees.

Hence, the meritocratic theater doesn't change, only the actors and the accepted merits.

 

[SouthernSurgeon]

Try the next 10 top funded programs, and after those, the next ten. Irrespective of what they tell you, the name matters.

At the fellowship level it is much less about institutional name and much more about individual name. I.E. do you have a well known, MD-anderson trained, actively publishing surgical oncologist going to bat for you.

You want an academic GS program with two years of designated research and preferably a surg onc fellowship program. It is a well known fact that most programs have a predilection for their own trainees.

Debatable.

 

[Black Surgeon]

At the fellowship level it is much less about institutional name.

A seven year general surgery program at Hopkins with a letter from one of their surg oncs looks better than a 7 years general surgery program at the University of Minnesota, even if the U of Minnesota GS trainee had Dr. Vikers himself (a well respected, well known and published surg onc at U of MN) making an exhaustive amount of phone calls in his or her favor (with all else being equal).

Now, training under Dr. Vickers himself as a surg onc fellow, is a completely different story than merely getting a letter of approval from him. But since we're talking about GS surgical training and not surg onc training, I would opt for a "big name" GS program rather than a less well known GS program with a great surg onc attending on staff that you'll barely get to see.

Not to mention that more times than not, the "big name" academic guys are at the "big institutional name" programs. Yes, I know there are exceptions, but this statement holds true in the vast majority of cases.

The institutional name matters at all levels, even post training. This isn't to say that the U of M GS trainee with Dr. "Big name" pulling for him wouldn't have a great shot, but simply to speak in relative terms.

I.E. do you have a well known, MD-anderson trained, actively publishing surgical oncologist going to bat for you.

This statement only aids in strengthening my point. The dependent variable, and thus the determining factor in your evaluation of the said surgical oncologist's esteem is in fact his place of training, which (as you have so clearly illustrated) in this case is MD-Anderson: A big institutional name program.

Debatable.

Not as "debatable" as you seem to think. Do a quick search of any well respected/competitive academic surgical program, across all surgical subspecialties and tell me if most don't have numerous fellows and attendings who trained in-house.

 

[SouthernSurgeon]

A seven year general surgery program at Hopkins looks a lot better than a 7 years general surgery program at the University of Minnesota, even if the U of Minnesota GS trainee had Dr. Vikers himself (a well respected, well known and published surg onc at U of MN) making an exhaustive amount of phone calls in his or her favor.

Thanks for the help on who Dr. Vickers (not Vikers) is. He interviewed me last year so I am pretty familiar.

This statement only aids in strengthening my point. The dependent variable, and thus the determining factor in your evaluation of the said surgical oncologist's esteem is in fact his place of training, which (as you have so clearly illustrated) in this case is MD-Anderson: A big institutional name program.

Yes, but please explain to me the strength of the MD Anderson general surgery residency. I wouldn't recommend going to UT-Houston because of its loose affiliation rather than (as in your above example) UofM.

Not as "debatable" as you seem to think. Do a quick search of any well respected/competitive academic surgical program, across all surgical subspecialties and tell me if most don't have numerous fellows and attendings who trained in-house.

The two strongest surg onc programs (MSKCC, MDA) are independent, i.e. they do not have a residency program. My statement was specific to surg onc as that is what the OP expressed an interest in. Yes you could go to Cornell and brag about your two months at MSKCC, but it is hard to argue that that gives you an advantage over the candidates from other strong general surgery programs.

Again, my comments are limited to surgical oncology...a field where if you didn't go to one of two programs you will nearly always be viewed as "second-fiddle", and a field where neither of those programs has a general surgery residency. I'm also speaking from the perspective of someone who is currently rotating on a fellowship-heavy month and sees how that affects the education and experience of the general surgery residents.

 

[Black Surgeon]

Thanks for the help on who Dr. Vickers (not Vikers) is. He interviewed me last year so I am pretty familiar.

Being self-aggrandizing in your rebuttal doesn't offer any strength to your argument.

Yes, but please explain to me the strength of the MD Anderson general surgery residency.

Ha! I won't respond to this, for a reason which I'm sure you're well aware of, but read my statement again. You seem to have misconstrued my point.

The two strongest surg onc programs (MSKCC, MDA) are independent, i.e. they do not have a residency program. My statement was specific to surg onc. Yes you could go to Cornell and brag about your two months at MSKCC, but it is hard to argue that that gives you an advantage over the candidates from other strong general surgery programs.

Again, my comments are limited to surgical oncology...a field where if you didn't go to one of two programs you will nearly always be viewed as "second-fiddle", and a field where neither of those programs has a general surgery residency. I'm also speaking from the perspective of someone who is currently rotating on a fellowship-heavy month and sees how that affects the education and experience of the general surgery residents.

Your opinion about which programs are regarded as "the strongest" is debatable.

Nevertheless, this doesn't disprove the fact that those from the "big name institutions" will most likely have a letter from a "big name" guy (since they are most often more plentiful at these institutions and consequently, may have a greater chance at matching.

In fact! Do a search of the MSKCC and MDA fellows for the past 6 years, and I guarantee you most will be from "big name institutions"

 

[Black Surgeon]

The two strongest surg onc programs (MSKCC, MDA) are independent, i.e. they do not have a residency program. My statement was specific to surg onc as that is what the OP expressed an interest in. Yes you could go to Cornell and brag about your two months at MSKCC, but it is hard to argue that that gives you an advantage over the candidates from other strong general surgery programs.

Again, my comments are limited to surgical oncology...a field where if you didn't go to one of two programs you will nearly always be viewed as "second-fiddle", and a field where neither of those programs has a general surgery residency. I'm also speaking from the perspective of someone who is currently rotating on a fellowship-heavy month and sees how that affects the education and experience of the general surgery residents.

You argue about "individual name", yet all you've done thus far is stressed the importance of the "institutional name", you've yet to name one "individual name". With that said, it is safe to say you've illustrated your argument to be oxymoronic at best.

 

[SouthernSurgeon]

You argue about "individual name", yet all you've done thus far is stressed the importance of the "institutional name". You have yet to name one "individual name". With that said, it is safe to say you've illustrated your argument to be oxymoronic at best.

These are two separate issues that you are conflating - the quality of the fellowship programs themselves and the process of getting there

If you are going for surg onc, I would argue that you should do everything you can to get to one of those two institutions.

But the focus of the discussion previously was on how to get there. And I would still argue that having a well-respected, well-known mentor going to bat for you is one of the biggest factors in getting you there. That could be accomplished by Dr. Vickers or by Dr. McMasters at Louisville or by Dr. Clary at Duke or the list goes on and on and on.

Are there advantages to going to MGH, Hopkins, Brigham, etc? Certainly. I'm not stupid enough to argue otherwise. But it is also very much about what you do when you are at your residency program, and a candidate with the right connections will do very well.

 

[SLUser11]

Stuff

Stuff

Look, if you guys want me to write a letter for you, quit beating around the bush and just ask me already.

After all, I have many leather-bound books and my apartment smells of rich mahogany.



Seriously, though, you guys are both sort of right, and the conversation is getting too heated to be productive.

To the OP: What I think you'll find is that the bigger the name (institution or specific surgeon), the better the fellowship opportunities. However, there are lots of surgery programs that can match you into a solid fellowship, and they're not all in Baltimore. I think it's important to find a place that is a good fit for you, and will give you an appropriate surgical education.

 

[SouthernSurgeon]

Being self-aggrandizing in your rebuttal doesn't offer any strength to your argument.

My point wasn't to be self-aggrandizing, but rather to point out that those of us in general surgery don't need help from a second year med student to know who the major players are.

 

[Black Surgeon]

My point wasn't to be self-aggrandizing, but rather to point out that those of us in general surgery don't need help from a second year med student to know who the major players are.

I'm actually still in high school .

 

[45408]

Being self-aggrandizing in your rebuttal doesn't offer any strength to your argument.

You started it, and he finished it.

 

[surg]

As you say, the usual suspects are all fine, so I won't go into that (do a search for top programs or top 10 programs, etc. So I'll write about what to look for in the less obvious places.

#1: In general, if you can find an institution with a track record of placing people into the fellowships you desire, that is a very good sign. It indicates some combination of good substrate, good mentorship, and commitment to making sure that people do well. In addition, programs that you will be applying to will be familiar with the output of that program (hopefully prior graduates did well in those programs). Plus, fellows in surg onc often have input into who comes the following year, so having someone in your corner from your institution never hurts.

All other things being equal, look for a program that has fellowship trained surgeons in the fellowship field you are interested in. They are the most likely to have connections back to their home fellowship institutions or connections via those societies to people you might want to be introduced to. Prominent folks are nice, but I wouldn't hang my hat on any 1 person. People leave. You don't get to go with them to their next job, so in my mind you'd find a place with multiple people in your field that are likely to be helpful.

All other things being equal, especially for surg onc, the opportunity for a research experience (or at least publishing experience) with someone well regarded in that field is also helpful. While not everyone needs to take 2 years out to do research, surg onc in particular really values research productivity, so if you don't take time out, do your best to at least write a few clinical papers. The year I entered fellowship, the median number of pubs for matched applicants was 9, and the median number of pubs for unmatched applicants was 1. Food for thought. I knew people in my year who go accepted places with no pubs, but, let's just say, it's easier to be the rule than the exception.

Finally, but perhaps most importantly, find someplace you can thrive. You are going to look better with an LOR that says "This is the best resident we've had in a decade" from some smaller place, than a LOR that says, "This is a resident who is in good standing and will graduate on time" from a big name place. If you go someplace you will be miserable, just because it has a big name, I can almost guarantee you the second version. So go ahead on pass on the bigger name, so long as the alternative is reasonable and you'll perform better there for whatever reason.

 

[JackADeli]

A seven year general surgery program at Hopkins with a letter from one of their surg oncs looks better than a 7 years general surgery program at the University of Minnesota, even if the U of Minnesota GS trainee had Dr. Vikers himself...

Not going into the whole debate. I just want to leave words of caution for the med-students applying to general surgery with such ideas....

If you are at MGH/Hopkins/etc... and A big name leaves... you still graduated/trained at Hopkins/MGH/etc... It is not uncommon for big names to walk to bigger/different ponds. I strongly caution you against choosing a general surgery program in the boonies because there is some ~"famous" big name in your area of interest. It is very likely your patients and hiring CEOs will not know who big name, big shot was.... It is a mistake to think you have a shortcut by going to a ~less competitive program that has one "big name" surgeon.

Also keep in mind, maybe the big name is in the boonies for a reason? Maybe you go to the boonies and he/she can not stand you. Who is your alternative? In a "Big Place", you have options.... and the institution's name.

Finally, A big name surgeon gets that name after numerous years of effort. By the time they are "Big Name" they may very well be interested in moving to big name institution or retiring. With current economy and uncertain legislation, many big names are looking for a way to cash in over the next few years. Some are increasingly selling their clout and credibility to industry, etc....

So, choose an over-all program. Don't be that high school athlete that chose a university for the coach only to find the coach left once you got there.

 

[Black Surgeon]

My point wasn't to be self-aggrandizing, but rather to point out that those of us in general surgery don't need help from a second year med student to know who the major players are.

You started it, and he finished it.

I believe SouthernIM's difficulties with my statements lie in his inability to reconcile with his present predicament at a Non-"big name" program with a guy whom he considers a "big name", for whom he's been doing laundry and getting coffee for every week in hopes of obtaining a stamp of approval.

Tell me SouthernIM, does your "individual name" guy make you dog-sit? Do you cut his grass and polish his car? Your attitude about achieving professional end goals seems very akin to those of the Dwight character from the office.

90% of us will and have gone to Non-"big name" Medical schools and Residency programs and will and have managed to get into the specialties and sub-specialties of choice. I'd be hard pressed to believe an "individual name" on an LOR was (or will be) the main driving force in achieving such success.

You choose to advocate buttering up to the guy above you, rather than to stress the importance of hard work for the majority of us without an institutional name to stand on i.e., busting ones balls in the lab or with Medical record charts to publish as many papers as possible in the field of interest during Medical school or GS residency. But no, you'd rather the effort be spend reenacting the role of Dwight.

 

[45408]

I believe SouthernIM's difficulties with my statements lie in his inability to reconcile with his present predicament at a Non-"big name" program with a guy whom he considers a "big name", for whom he's been doing laundry and getting coffee for every week in hopes of obtaining a stamp of approval.

Tell me SouthernIM, does your "individual name" guy make you dog-sit? Do you cut his grass and polish his car? Your attitude about achieving professional end goals seems very akin to those of the Dwight character from the office.

90% of us will and have gone to Non-"big name" Medical schools and Residency programs and will and have managed to get into the specialties and sub-specialties of choice. I'd be hard pressed to believe an "individual name" on an LOR was (or will be) the main driving force in achieving such success.

You choose to advocate buttering up to the guy above you, rather than to stress the importance of hard work for the majority of us without an institutional name to stand on i.e., busting ones balls in the lab or with Medical record charts to publish as many papers as possible in the field of interest during Medical school or GS residency. But no, you'd rather the effort be spend reenacting the role of Dwight.

Why are you being so rude and presumptuous? He didn't even say that he's at U of MN, just that he interviewed there. He certainly said nothing of kissing some guy's ass, a name that you mentioned in the first place.

 

[filter07]

Children, your high school BS is not tolerated here. Most fellowships are easy to get. Most of this discussion is moot.

 

[Winged Scapula]

There is no need to be insulting and arrogant in our discussions with each other. Being presumptuous about each other's motives is also unappreciated.

If users cannot remain civil then the thread shall be closed.

 

[SouthernSurgeon]

I believe SouthernIM's difficulties with my statements lie in his inability to reconcile with his present predicament at a Non-"big name" program with a guy whom he considers a "big name"

Actually, you would be wrong on both counts. I am at a "big name" program, but given that I've been here for only a couple of months I haven't managed to find someone I consider a good mentor yet. I left my two very close (and yes, very "big name") mentors behind at my "big name" med school when I graduated.

Tell me SouthernIM, does your "individual name" guy make you dog-sit? Do you cut his grass and polish his car? Your attitude about achieving professional end goals seems very akin to those of the Dwight character from the office.

A real, quality mentoring relationship is nothing like what you describe. A mentor will help you get to where you need to be by taking an interest in your personal and professional development, pushing you to develop yourself, and by providing opportunities for that development.

You choose to advocate buttering up to the guy above you,

That is never what I said. Your deliberate misinterpretations and pointless attacks on me serve no purpose.

 

[Black Surgeon]

Your deliberate misinterpretations and pointless attacks on me serve no purpose.

Neither did your deliberate attempts to belittle me with condescending statements and questions.

I have nothing more to say on the matter, and will refrain from responding to subsequent statements in this thread.

 

[JackADeli]

That went well and got there fast! wow

 

[SouthernSurgeon]

That went well and got there fast! wow

Apologies for my role in the devolution of this thread.

 

[pnle119]

Just got paged at 1:00am to adjust a patient's maintenance fluids and now I'm browsing the forum because I can't go back to sleep. Anyways, is it just me or do a lot of threads get derailed here in Surgery world? I wonder if this type of thing happens in the Medicine forums...probably not.

 

[JackADeli]

Just got paged at 1:00am to adjust a patient's maintenance fluids and now I'm browsing the forum because I can't go back to sleep. Anyways, is it just me or do a lot of threads get derailed here in Surgery world? I wonder if this type of thing happens in the Medicine forums...probably not.

I can't speak to medicine(IM) specifically. I surf quite a few different specialty forums. They get heated and derailed very easily if you are unwilling to drink the KoolAid. All it takes is to question what dogma they spout and boom! There seems, IMHO, in general, to be an intolerance of difference of opinion and/or questioning. There is even less tolerance of question if you are in a different specialty.

While med-students may disagree... I have not found surgery any worse then other forums. Sometimes, I think it is actually a little better. New residents & residents in general often do ask questions here and get reasonable responses most of the time.

 

[treehorsio]

to redirect this thread and provide at least a sorta different perspective:

I agree with a PP response regarding looking at who matches where, or, more specifically, if you want Surg Onc, look at MDA/MSKCC fellows and where they've come from in the past couple years.

A few disagreements I have with the previous posters:
I think it is much more about publishing and "getting your name out", preferrably with a wellknown S.O. researcher than going to a place with a surg onc fellowship.

My insitution is relatively well known for S.O., but we do NOT have a fellowship. However, 3 of our 5 chiefs last year went to either MDA or MSKCC (I admit, it was sort of a banner year for us) ...but usually about one a year go to one of the those two.

So, don't hang your hat on having to go to a place with a fellowship of your interest. Who knows, you might change your mind any way! I can hardly believe it myself but one of the reasons I ranked my program is because they had a strong transplant division! (blegh blegh blegh). I soon came to my senses.

 

[Guile]

to redirect this thread and provide at least a sorta different perspective:

I agree with a PP response regarding looking at who matches where, or, more specifically, if you want Surg Onc, look at MDA/MSKCC fellows and where they've come from in the past couple years.

A few disagreements I have with the previous posters:
I think it is much more about publishing and "getting your name out", preferrably with a wellknown S.O. researcher than going to a place with a surg onc fellowship.

My insitution is relatively well known for S.O., but we do NOT have a fellowship. However, 3 of our 5 chiefs last year went to either MDA or MSKCC (I admit, it was sort of a banner year for us) ...but usually about one a year go to one of the those two.

So, don't hang your hat on having to go to a place with a fellowship of your interest. Who knows, you might change your mind any way! I can hardly believe it myself but one of the reasons I ranked my program is because they had a strong transplant division! (blegh blegh blegh). I soon came to my senses.

How many fellows do MDA and MSKCC take a year? I swear almost everyone you talk to says they send a fellow there almost every year. From reading SDN you'd think they took 20 a year.

 

[SouthernSurgeon]

How many fellows do MDA and MSKCC take a year? I swear almost everyone you talk to says they send a fellow there almost every year. From reading SDN you'd think they took 20 a year.

I wondered the same thing last year on the interview trail after hearing all the programs who matched someone to MSKCC or MDA...

According to this: MSKCC takes 7/yr:
http://www.mskcc.org/mskcc/html/69079.cfm

And according to this: MDA takes either 7 or 14 (can't tell if it is 7 for each track or 7 total)
http://www.surgonc.org/default.aspx?id=79

 

[DoctorCthulhu]

Minor threadjack. I've been meaning to post this for a long time actually, out of curiosity.

Whenever Surg Onc is brought up, everybody seems to agree that Memorial Sloan-Kettering and M. D. Anderson are the places to be.

What other places have good fellowships? If I had to guess I'd say Roswell Park and Fox Chase, though to be honest all I know about either is what's on their respective websites. Does anyone have actual experience or feedback on such programs?

And what about traditional institutions with strong GS residencies opening up Surg Onc fellowship spots (e.g. BWH/Dana-Farber, Hopkins, U. Chicago)? I imagine there's bound to be some competition for cases between GS chiefs and Surg Onc fellows. Again, does anyone have any concrete info on those programs?

 

[Guile]

Minor threadjack. I've been meaning to post this for a long time actually, out of curiosity.

Whenever Surg Onc is brought up, everybody seems to agree that Memorial Sloan-Kettering and M. D. Anderson are the places to be.

What other places have good fellowships? If I had to guess I'd say Roswell Park and Fox Chase, though to be honest all I know about either is what's on their respective websites. Does anyone have actual experience or feedback on such programs?

And what about traditional institutions with strong GS residencies opening up Surg Onc fellowship spots (e.g. BWH/Dana-Farber, Hopkins, U. Chicago)? I imagine there's bound to be some competition for cases between GS chiefs and Surg Onc fellows. Again, does anyone have any concrete info on those programs?

Poke around a little bit. I know you'll turn up something (but I also like having fresh opinions).

Here's surgoncforya's post from not that long ago. It's a good review of many surg onc programs.

I am a surg onc fellow and I love it. Huge cases, lots of collaboration with medical oncology & radiation oncology. You get exposure to such a wide variety of cases, major HPB, breast, melanoma, upper GI, lower GI, thoracic, H&N, etc.

The applicaiton process was competitive, and I think research, letters, etc are the most important part. I didn't take dedicated time off from residency but did some research at MSK on post-call days, etc and got a nice paper out of it.

I think the big programs and only "first tier" programs are MSK and MDA. They are clearly superior to the other programs in terms of research, reputation, etc. They are also EXTREMELY competitive and I think a lot comes down to who you know. For example, I know someone who took 2 years in research, nature publication, excellent resident with the best credentials and didn't even get an interview at MSK.

I think the rest of the programs are all very good, the SSO only gives fellowship status to a limited number of high-quality programs, so the overall fellowship quality is excellent no matter where you go. I am at a "2nd tier" type program and I'll give you a brief run down on my experience from interviews. Note, this is highly biased, entirely subjective, and just based on limited experience and may in fact change from year to year.

MSK, MDA- highly selective, outstading training. Only possible downfall is perhaps limited experience as the surgeon, instead you will be 1st assist.

City of hope- very nice, tons of OR volume, very good laparoscopy (largest robotic rectal series out there). Lots of hours, not very cush but will come out with outstading training. Stand alone program with no residents

Ohio- among the best, very busy lots of volume not much MIS. Probably the best program for autonomy, they want to make sure they don't have to teach you to operate. Very dynamic faculty highly respected.

Fox Chase- huge in laparoscopy (lap major livers, HPB, robotic rectal/APR/TME, etc) get lots of H&N and thoracic (maybe too much if you don't want to do it in practice), Most cases are done directly with attending so probably middle of road in terms of autonomy. Stand-alone cancer center with no residents

Chicago- very well respected program big research center 3 year program with 1.5 clinical 1.5 research. Posner is boss and he is very well known. Good training

Moffitt- highly liked during interview trail, I didn't interview here

Toronto- very nice if you like Canada. They can adapt training according to your wishes, for example can make 2nd year a colorectal fellowship (HUGE!). Big HPB program but they have their own HPB fellowship. Lots of interaction/shared cases with residents

Roswell Park- part of the initial 3 programs in surg onc (MSK, MDA, Roswell) very good place, lots of research available. Dedicated center with minimal resident interaction.

Brigham/Dana Farber- among the worst programs for surg onc (excellent hospital of course) fellowship bad because residents are very strong, too much competition from residents for cases and you will as the fellow get 2nd dibs. Powerhouse for research/resources so may be the right place for someone who likes the research.

Hopkins- similar to Dana Farber, fellowship seems like 2nd class citizen

John Wayne- Santa Monica!! Huge melanoma (Morton) and breast program (Giuliano). Home of the sentinel node. Spread out across LA for colorectal, etc. Competitive place, and I liked it very much.

Virginia- smaller program and not as competitive on the trail

Providence (Roger Williams)- small program and not as competitive on the trail but Espat is great liver surgeon. Very dynamic guy exciting to be around I think you will get outstanding HPB here

Pittsburgh- Probably the best place in the SSO for HPB. They have several different tracks according to your interest- research, MIS, HPB... extremely competitive work very hard get very nice training. Also big HIPEC center.

Miami- smaller program, not much MIS but big proportion of very advanced disease huge cases. Lots of residents around to help with service but I didn't get the feeling they had much competition.



I am sure I'm probably forgetting a couple but these were my immediate thoughts. You need to get your own opinion and judge for yourself. Each place has different feel, strengths/weaknesses. For example- no residents means no competition for cases (good), but if chest tube needs to be put in at 3am you are the one to go in and do it (bad). Several of the stand-alone centers have NO ER!! How great is that! (MDA, MSK, Fox Chase, City of Hope, Moffitt)

Good luck!

 

[treehorsio]

I wondered the same thing last year on the interview trail after hearing all the programs who matched someone to MSKCC or MDA...

According to this: MSKCC takes 7/yr:
http://www.mskcc.org/mskcc/html/69079.cfm

And according to this: MDA takes either 7 or 14 (can't tell if it is 7 for each track or 7 total)
http://www.surgonc.org/default.aspx?id=79

Is there a way to actually find names for the fellows? I couldn't find it on their websites. I did look back at our own programs #s and we did indeed have 3/5 for 2010, 1/5 for 2009, 1/5 in 2006, but none in 2007/2008. So I guess it's only 5/25.

Plus, one of the guys last year is doing some sarcoma/breast only track (i.e. "lifestyle" surg onc!)

 

[nosugrefneb]

Hi all,

Interesting thread. As a third-year med student, I'm starting to explore residency options with the eventual goal of training in surg onc.

Outside of the training-at-places-with-SO-fellowships question (which seems...controversial), are there programs out there that have the reputation of consistently matching folks to surg onc fellowships, or is this sort of thing more dependent on individual classes in a given year? For example, I've noticed that Northwestern has had a ton of people go into surg onc over the years (relative to other programs I've looked into); is Northwestern "known" for this, or am I making something out of nothing? If it's the former, are other programs "known" for this as well?

Thanks in advance,
Ben

 

[thedrjojo]

I'm sure you can find ton of programs that "match" into surg onc frequently, it really depends on the residents individual desires. My program has had about 3 in the past 5-6 years or so, because they have had 3 people want surg onc in that time frame. Went to UChicago, Roswell, and City of Hope. Also if you go a few years back further we have Fox Chase, another City of Hope, etc. Most academic residencies probably have similar stories. I know NYU in the past 5 years or so has sent 5 to surg onc, and all 5 went to MSKCC. Cornell spends more than 2 months as another poster alluded to at MSKCC, but when I interviewed there, a chief was going to Pitt for his surg onc fellowship, partially cause he wanted a different perspective (whether this is true or if he just didn't match at MSKCC and wanted to save face?).

If you check out this years match results (http://surgonc.org/training--education/surgical-oncology-fellowships/match-results-2011.aspx) which lists where the resident is from

 

[nosugrefneb]

Good to know. Thanks!

 

[Guile]

Hi all,

Interesting thread. As a third-year med student, I'm starting to explore residency options with the eventual goal of training in surg onc.

Outside of the training-at-places-with-SO-fellowships question (which seems...controversial), are there programs out there that have the reputation of consistently matching folks to surg onc fellowships, or is this sort of thing more dependent on individual classes in a given year? For example, I've noticed that Northwestern has had a ton of people go into surg onc over the years (relative to other programs I've looked into); is Northwestern "known" for this, or am I making something out of nothing? If it's the former, are other programs "known" for this as well?

Thanks in advance,
Ben

I would just forget about looking specifically at programs with surg onc fellowships as places to go to help you match into surg onc. I don't think UT-Houston has a great reputation for a great place to train or a great place to match into surg onc, for example, but MD Anderson is probably the best place to train for surg onc. There are a few programs that have had incredible surg onc matches recently, and it's no coincidence that they are great academic programs. You mentioned Northwestern which has placed people consistently at top surg onc programs (specifically MSK). NYU has also placed people into MSK recently with regularity. Emory has had a recent strong surg onc showing as well. There are a few. But I wouldn't necessarily put those at the top of your list. If you want to train at the top places for surg onc, then you just need to go to a really strong place overall, and find a place that suits you well. You may not like the people or environment at Northwestern or NYU for example, and may not thrive there which will make it tough to match in surg onc. You need to first find a place where you will thrive, and then a place where there are known faculty. Honestly, I think it comes down to who you know. Few people, if anyone, match at MDA or MSK without a phone call from someone they trust. EVERYONE they are considering matching has good letters of rec, good ABSITEs, compelling research, etc., and it comes down to a phone call from someone they trust, i.e. someone they trained, trained with, did a book chapter together with, drinks with at the SSO meeting...you get the point. So look at the traditional top programs (you know which they are because everyone talks about them).

Now, whether you should place your interest in surg onc at the top of the list in how you decide where to go is another question entirely. Statistically, you will likely change your mind. Just go somewhere where you like the people. I think that's the most important thing. Everything else will shake itself out. Seriously.

 

[SLUser11]

I don't think UT-Houston has a great reputation for a great place to train or a great place to match into surg onc, for example....

They actually seem to have pretty good fellowship placements. That being said, I would agree that it's a pretty miserable place to train based on my second-hand knowledge....they have a poorly balanced pain to benefit ratio.

 

[Guile]

They actually seem to have pretty good fellowship placements. That being said, I would agree that it's a pretty miserable place to train based on my second-hand knowledge....they have a poorly balanced pain to benefit ratio.

Yeah those are very strong. Very few going into the community afterward interestingly.

they have a poorly balanced pain to benefit ratio

Exactly what I've heard. Second- to third-hand though.

 

[thedrjojo]

They actually seem to have pretty good fellowship placements. That being said, I would agree that it's a pretty miserable place to train based on my second-hand knowledge....they have a poorly balanced pain to benefit ratio.

They sure seem to take their own a lot (3/4 stayed at UT-Houston this year alone).

Not blown away by their placement, but definitely respectable