|
How many volunteers were present at the Congress? : |
more than 2000 people |
|
Delegates from which countries presented in the congress? : |
USA, Canada, different countries from Europe and Asia, Africa |
|
Were the delegates of any other organizations present in the congress? : |
Yes |
|
If yes, please write the names of the organizations in the box : |
UEGW |
|
What were the responses to your talking points? Were specific questions or concerns raised? : |
The audiences enjoyed because of novelty of the study and also very strict for eligibility, inclusion and exclusion criteria. Some of them had some comments and asking some questions. One of the good comments was the reason for high rate of acute pancreatitis n both pharmacologic and endoscopic (PD stent) intervention groups. Actually it was due to the number of risk factors for developing post-ERCP pancreatitis in both groups. At the same time our study has been done in a tertiary governmental fellow-based hospital and in this field the rate of pancreatitis can be higher. Also they asked me regarding the rate of post-ERCP pancreatitis and the size of PD stents used in the study. One of question was about the complications of PD stenting. |
|
If you met staff members, please list their full names & positions. : |
Dr. B.J.Elmunzer, Dr. Alan Barkun, Dr. Anand Sahaei |
|
Please inform us if there are any follow up actions we need to talk with the members of the congress : |
you can ask concerning the importance of our study, do promotion for the attendings who have novelty in their projects and also as they have a role for increasing the scientific knowledge. You may have more protection and support the academic staff for this type of activities which could be a honor for the university and our dear country. The studies with oral presentations have a good credit for our university. You can offer to the congress for more attention to the universities with good projects as an index for rankings of universities. |
|
Your experiences about the travel processes(Providing ticket, accommodation,...) : |
I provided booking ticket and hotel by myself |
|
Please give a briefing of your own observations and outcomes of the congress: : |
Very useful and scientific congress better than European ones. At the same time during four days you can find lectures in 20 halls in different filed of gastroenterology and hepatology. Usually the first two days were about post-graduate course that is a very good review for general and common gastrointestinal and hepatobiliary disorders. Some sessions was related to best of Video presentation and it was a very practical point of view. The other portion of this congress was the active participation in exhibition halls where the companies both accessory and endoscopy producers presented their products. We could know new cncepts and ideas regarding the accessories and new endosops. We also met the members and bosses of these companies and I as the director of advanced endosopy education program talked about our problem for post-marketings of their products after sanction removal. |