The AATS abstract submission is a formal process through which researchers submit brief summaries of original thoracic surgery research for potential presentation at the American Association for Thoracic Surgery's annual scientific meeting. Submissions must include a structured abstract, author affiliations, and compliance with formatting standards set by the association.
Each abstract undergoes peer review by a committee of specialists in cardiothoracic surgery, transplant medicine, and related fields. Acceptance depends on scientific merit, novelty, clinical relevance, and adherence to submission guidelines. Final decisions are communicated via email within six weeks of the deadline.
Submissions are evaluated based on clarity, methodology rigor, statistical validity, and potential impact on patient care or surgical innovation. Accepted abstracts are presented orally or as posters during the conference, offering authors visibility among leading professionals in the field.
Researchers begin by creating a structured abstract of no more than 300 words. This includes sections for Background, Methods, Results, and Conclusion. The abstract must reflect original work completed within the past 18 months and not previously published in a peer-reviewed journal.
After drafting, authors upload their submission through the AATS online portal. Required documents include the abstract text, a list of presenting authors with institutional affiliations, and a conflict-of-interest disclosure statement. All submissions must be submitted by the published deadline-typically in early February for the following year's meeting.
Once received, each abstract is assigned a unique ID and reviewed by at least three reviewers using a standardized rubric. Scores are averaged, and abstracts are ranked. Top-ranked submissions are selected for presentation, with priority given to those demonstrating significant clinical insight or technical advancement.
Abstracts must follow a strict format: Background (≤50 words), Methods (≤75 words), Results (≤100 words), and Conclusion (≤50 words). Titles must be under 150 characters and avoid abbreviations unless widely recognized (e.g., CABG).
Use of passive voice is discouraged. Active verbs improve clarity and readability. For example, "We performed" rather than "It was performed." Data must be reported with precise metrics-percentages, p-values, confidence intervals-not vague descriptors like "significant" or "improved."
Authors must confirm they have obtained necessary IRB approval if human subjects were involved. Animal study protocols require IACUC documentation. Failure to provide these may result in automatic rejection.
| Element | Requirement | Example |
|---|---|---|
| Title | Under 150 characters | "Outcomes of Robotic-Assisted Mitral Valve Repair in High-Risk Patients" |
| Background | ≤50 words | "Mitral valve repair reduces long-term mortality compared to replacement, but outcomes in high-risk patients remain suboptimal." |
| Methods | ≤75 words | "Retrospective analysis of 120 consecutive patients undergoing robotic mitral repair between 2021-2023. Primary endpoint: 30-day mortality." |
| Results | ≤100 words | "30-day mortality was 2.5%. Reoperation rate was 1.7%. Mean hospital stay was 5.2 days (SD ±1.4)." |
| Conclusion | ≤50 words | "Robotic-assisted repair is safe and effective in high-risk patients with low morbidity and favorable outcomes." |
Many submissions fail due to non-compliance with formatting rules. A common error is exceeding word counts in individual sections. Even one extra word can trigger automated rejection. Always count characters, not just words.
Another frequent issue is omitting conflict-of-interest disclosures. The AATS requires all authors to declare financial ties to device manufacturers or pharmaceutical companies. Failure to do so results in disqualification-even if the research is strong.
Some applicants assume that submitting multiple abstracts increases chances of acceptance. However, the AATS limits each investigator to three submissions per cycle. Exceeding this cap leads to immediate disqualification. Submit only your strongest, most novel work.
In 2023, Dr. Elena Torres submitted an abstract titled "Machine Learning Predicts Postoperative Atrial Fibrillation After Lung Resection." Her abstract included:
Dr. Torres adhered strictly to formatting, disclosed her grant funding from a health tech startup, and submitted two weeks before the deadline. Her abstract was accepted for oral presentation and later cited in a national guideline update.
Presenting at the AATS annual meeting offers researchers access to a global audience of surgeons, scientists, and industry leaders. Accepted abstracts are published in the *Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery*'s supplement, increasing visibility and citation potential.
For trainees and early-career faculty, presentation at AATS enhances career advancement. Many residency programs and fellowship committees view AATS participation as evidence of scholarly engagement and research competence.
The AATS maintains a database of all accepted abstracts since 2010. Researchers can search past submissions to identify gaps in literature or benchmark their work against established studies.
AATS abstract submission is not the same as journal submission. While both involve summarizing research, journal articles require full-length manuscripts with detailed methods, references, and discussion sections. Abstracts are not peer-reviewed in the same depth as full papers.
Also, unlike some conferences, AATS does not accept abstracts for poster-only presentation unless explicitly requested. All accepted submissions are either oral or poster presentations, with no hybrid options available.
Finally, some believe that submitting a late abstract still allows inclusion in the program. This is false. Late submissions are not processed. The system closes automatically at midnight on the deadline date, regardless of time zone.
I once submitted an abstract on minimally invasive esophagectomy outcomes. I included a graph in the supplementary materials, thinking it would strengthen the case. The review committee rejected it for violating the "no figures" rule. I learned that even if the portal allows attachments, the abstract itself must stand alone.
Now, I always draft my abstract without referring to visuals. Once finalized, I verify that every claim is supported by text alone. This ensures compliance and improves focus.
Successful aats abstract submission hinges on precision, timeliness, and adherence to standards. Focus on clarity, evidence, and completeness. Submit early. Review thoroughly. Your work deserves to be seen.