RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Many women grow up dreaming of becoming doctors, preferring specialties that allow more focus on time outside the hospital and on family life. Nowadays, specialties, like gastroenterology, have still a significant gender gap. METHODS: Based on this known discrepancy, a web-based questionnaire was designed by the Young Component of the Scientific Committee of the Federation of Italian Scientific Societies of Digestive Diseases 2023 (FISMAD) to examine the current situation of female gastroenterologists in Italy. The survey, designed specifically for this study, was sent by email to all female gastroenterologists and residents gastroenterologists, members of the three major Italian societies of Gastroenterology. RESULTS: A total of 423 female physicians responded to the survey: 325 (76.8%) had full-time employment, and only a few had an academic career (7.2%). The main occupations were outpatient clinics (n = 288, 68%) and diagnostic endoscopy (n = 289, 68.3%); only 175 (41.3%) performed interventional endoscopy. One hundred and forty-seven (34.7%) had the chance to attend a master in advanced or interventional endoscopy, while 133 (31.4%) faced disadvantages that enabled them to attend. Of the 244 (58%) who reported feeling underappreciated, 194 (79.5%) said it was due to gender bias. We found that women doctors considered themselves disadvantaged compared with men doctors due to career opportunities (n = 338), salary negotiations (n = 64), and training opportunities (n = 144). CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, gastroenterology still has a long way to go before approaching greater gender parity.
Assuntos
Gastroenterologistas , Gastroenterologia , Médicas , Humanos , Feminino , Itália , Médicas/estatística & dados numéricos , Gastroenterologia/estatística & dados numéricos , Inquéritos e Questionários , Gastroenterologistas/estatística & dados numéricos , Adulto , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Escolha da Profissão , Sexismo/estatística & dados numéricosRESUMO
Endoluminal biliary radiofrequency ablation (RFA) has been proposed as a palliative treatment for patients with malignant biliary obstruction (MBO) in order to improve stent patency and survival. However, the existing data on patients with inoperable extrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (eCCA) are conflicting. We performed a meta-analysis of randomized trials comparing RFA plus stenting versus stenting alone in patients with inoperable eCCA. We searched for trials published in the PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, and Cochrane databases up to November 2023. Data extraction was conducted from published studies, and a quality assessment was carried out in accordance with the guidelines recommended by the Cochrane Collaboration. Hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% CI were estimated from the trials. The primary endpoints of interest were overall survival and stent patency. Out of 275 results, 5 randomized trials and 370 patients were included. While overall survival was not different between the groups (HR 0.62; 95% CI 0.36-1.07; p = 0.09; I2 = 80%;), the subgroup analysis of studies employing plastic stents showed a trend toward better survival in the RFA-treated group (HR 0.42; 95% CI 0.22-0.80; p = 0.009; I2 = 72%). Stent patency was improved in patients receiving RFA (HR 0.64; 95% CI 0.45-0.90; p = 0.01; I2 = 23%). Adverse events were not different between the groups (OR 1.21; 95% CI 0.69-2.12; p = 0.50; I2 = 0%). Despite the promising results, high heterogeneity and potential biases in the included studies suggest the need for further high-quality randomized trials to explore the potential cumulative effects of RFA on CCA treatment outcomes.