Honorary Authorships in Surgical Literature.

INTRODUCTION: Honorary authorship (HA) is defined as an enlisted co-author who did not make sufficient contributions to merit being included as a co-author according to the ICMJE guidelines on authorship. It is unknown if HA is present in the surgical literature. METHODS: We analysed studies published in 2016 in five journals with the highest impact factor in general surgery. All original articles, reviews and clinical trials with more than one author were included. Corresponding authors of these manuscripts received an online survey by email. The survey consisted of three parts focussing on demographics, knowledge and application of the ICMJE guidelines, and deciding authorship. RESULTS: In total, 320 of the 1037 surveys were completed (30.9%). Two hundred and seventy-two (88.6%) of the corresponding authors were aware of the ICMJE authorship guidelines, and 203 (66.3%) were aware of the general issue of honorary authorship. One hundred and thirty-five (44.0%) responders reported at least one co-author who only performed tasks which should not merit actual authorship according to the ICMJE guidelines. Furthermore, only 46 (15.0%) of the responders believed that a co-author listed for their article did not make sufficient contribution to merit being included as co-author. No significant differences were found between the journals investigated. CONCLUSION: Despite ICMJE guidelines to reduce HA, the prevalence may still exist to a higher level than preferable. The authors plead for more transparent authorship systems in which journal editors and senior department members take more responsibility into enforcement of the ICMJE guidelines.

Iodine seed- versus wire-guided localization in breast-conserving surgery for non-palpable ductal carcinoma in situ.

BACKGROUND: Breast-conserving surgery for isolated non-palpable ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) is associated with high rates of incomplete surgical resection in comparison with unifocal invasive breast cancer. Therefore, accurate preoperative localization of the lesion is very important to facilitate adequate resection. Wire-guided localization (WGL) remains the standard for localization of DCIS. Recently, iodine-125 seed-guided localization (I-125 GL) was introduced as an alternative localization technique. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of these localization techniques in the resection of DCIS by breast-conserving surgery. METHODS: Between March 2006 and June 2013, 169 patients with non-palpable DCIS were treated with breast-conserving surgery. Only patients with pure DCIS on both preoperative core biopsy and definitive pathology were included. RESULTS: WGL was performed in 78 patients and I-125 GL in 91 patients. The groups did not differ with respect to age, size of DCIS or type of imaging used. Patients in the I-125 GL group had a significantly lower risk of extensively involved resection margins than those in the WGL group (4 versus 13 per cent respectively; P = 0·048). CONCLUSION: In patients treated with breast-conserving surgery for non-palpable DCIS, localization with iodine-125 seeds is superior to the WGL technique in reducing the risk of extensively involved resection margins.