Late Breaking Call for Abstracts

American Association of Clinical Anatomists
Late Breaking Call for Abstracts
38th Annual Meeting
June 28 - July 2, 2021

AACA will be using a software called Planstone to help with the abstract submissions process. In an effort to make things easier for those that have not done this process before, we have created a step-by-step instruction guide to help you submit your abstract. The submissions link is  posted to the Member's-Only page of the AACA Website. To view this, you will need to login to the AACA website with your member login here. This requires that you are an active member of AACA. Any new member applications that are received after 5 PM will be approved the following business day.

In order to submit an abstract for presentation at the 2021 AACA Annual Meeting, you must be a member of the American Association of Clinical Anatomists. Membership will be verified before the abstract is accepted. Please read this page thoroughly before submitting an abstract. Failure to follow correct abstract formatting will result in a returned abstract and will require resubmission with a $25 resubmission fee. Abstract guidelines and formatting instructions can be found below.

Abstract Acceptance/Rejection Letter Update:

The 2021 AACA Annual Meeting Abstracts are under review! During this time, authors will be unable to access their submissions. After the abstracts have been reviewed and processed, AACA will send out acceptance and rejection notices from the Planstone system. We estimate acceptance/rejection to be delivered to the first author, by mid-April. If anything changes, we will post updates here. 

  • We will begin accepting late breaking abstracts on March 4, 2021 at 8:00 a.m. EST. Authors will have until 12 PM EDT on March 23, 2021 to submit their work. 
  • An abstract submission fee will be assessed at the time of abstract submission. For Associate Members (Student, Postdoctoral Fellow, or Resident), the fee will be $35. For other members (Regular, Affiliate, and Senior), the fee will be $40.  This fee is non-refundable. 
  • The presenting author (i.e., first author) of an accepted abstract must register for the conference by May 7, 2021. Failure to register will result in your abstract being removed from the meeting program.
  • Students: Make sure it is clear on your abstract submission that you are a student and the presenting author by placing yourself as the first author. 
  • Work that is submitted is to be original and should NOT have been previously published or presented elsewhere. Work that has been published and/or presented elsewhere will not be accepted.  Publication of dissertation project through graduate school does not count.
  • Failure to follow correct abstract formatting will result in a returned abstract and will require resubmission with a $25 resubmission fee, which is non-refundable. Abstract formatting instructions can be found below.
All Abstracts Will Undergo a Two-Step Review Process:
  1. All abstracts will initially be reviewed to determine that the title, author(s), affiliation(s), and the body of the abstract are formatted correctly. Please read and follow the formatting guidelines carefully. If the abstract fails to follow the stated guidelines, it will be sent back to the first author for revision and resubmission. This will require a resubmission fee of $25. Thus, if the abstract is resubmitted after being returned for formatting errors and does not pass the format review a second time, the work will not move forward to content review and will not be accepted for presentation at the conference.
  2. If the abstract passes the initial review, it will undergo a blinded peer review process by the Abstract Review Committee. During the abstract review process, abstracts will be recommended for:
    • Acceptance for poster presentation only
    • Rejection
Instructions for Preparing Abstracts
  1. Author listing. First type the presenter’s last name in CAPITAL letters, followed by the first name and middle initial. The remaining authors follow with their first name first, then middle initial, and finally, their last name in all CAPITAL letters. To summarize, capitalize all of the last names and middle initials. Capitalize just the first letter of the first names.  Please place an "and" before the final author's name.
  2. Institutional affiliation. Type the name(s) of the department/hospital and institution for the author(s), followed by city, state, and country. Abbreviate names of states using the standard two letter postal abbreviations. Include postal/zip codes. Authors are limited to a maximum of 3 affiliations (institutional or departmental). For international members, give the city, state or province, postal code and country.
  3. Title. Use title case.  That is, all words except articles (e.g., a, an, the), conjunctions (e.g., and, or, but, so) and prepositions (e.g., above, among, over, within) should begin with a capital letter. Titles should also end with appropriate punctuation. The first word should be capitalized, as well as the first letter after a colon or a hyphen.  
  4. Body of the abstract. The body of the abstract must be composed as a single structured paragraph with the following headings embedded in the paragraph (in all CAPITAL letters followed by a period, NOT a colon). The body of the abstract and acknowledgements are limited to 2000 characters (including spaces). Do not indent the paragraph. The abstract should consist of text only. Do not include citations, tables or illustrations, or use undefined abbreviations. Place acknowledgments at the end in parentheses, e.g., “(Sponsored by Grant No. _____ from the _______ Association.)”

Examples of Proper Formatting for Research-Based and Descriptive Type Abstracts:

Research-based abstract (clinical, bench study, and educational)

TUBBS, R. Shane, and Marios LOUKAS. Children’s Hospital, Birmingham, AL 35233, USA. Novel Method for Cerebrospinal Fluid Diversion Utilizing the Sternum: A Cadaveric and Animal Study.

INTRODUCTION. Additional distal sites for placement of cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) diversionary shunts may be necessary in some patients. The present study aimed to investigate the sternum as a potential receptacle for CSF for potential application in patients with hydrocephalus. METHODS. Five fresh adult human cadavers less than four hours from time of death underwent cannulation of the manubrium in a suprasternal location. Tap water was infused via a metal trocar for approximately 60 minutes. Additionally, morphometric examination of the manubrium from 40 adult human skeletons was performed including the height, width, and thickness of this part of the sternum. Lastly, two anesthesized rhesus monkeys underwent cannulation of the manubrium with infusion of 50 cc of saline over approximately one hour while monitoring vital signs. SUMMARY. A total of 30 L of water was easily injected into all cadaveric specimens without overflow from the infusion site or noticeable edema of the body. Upon inspection of the thoracic and abdominal cavities, no fluid accumulation was identified insuring that all infused fluid had gone into the vascular system. The manubrium had a mean length, width, and thickness of 5.1 cm, 5.0 cm and 1 cm, respectively. The two animal specimens tolerated the infusion of saline into the sternum without vital sign changes or evidence of saline leakage into the pleural cavity. CONCLUSIONS. Based on our cadaveric, osteological, and animal study, the manubrium of the sternum is an ideal location for the placement of the distal end of a CSF diversionary shunt. In vivo human studies are now required to verify our findings.

ROBERTS, Shannon L.1, Joanna WEBER2, Zhi LI1, Adel FATTAH3, Michele OLIVER2, Anne M.R. AGUR1, and Karen GORDON21Division of Anatomy, Department of Surgery, University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, M5S 1A8, Canada; 2School of Engineering, University of Guelph, Guelph, ON, N1G 2W1, Canada; 3Department of Plastic Surgery, Alder Hey Children’s NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool L12 2AP, United Kingdom. Morphology of Human Forearm Muscles: Fiber Bundle Architecture and Tendon Tissue Properties.

INTRODUCTION. The architecture and tissue properties of the musculotendinous unit are unique to each muscle and are integral to determining its functional attributes. Studies quantifying these properties are scarce and often relate to a single muscle group or a sampling of muscles. Without a thorough knowledge of normal musculotendinous morphology, it is difficult to assess pathology. The purpose of this study is to quantify and compare the architectural parameters and tendon tissue properties of 16 forearm muscles. METHODS. The fiber bundles and external/internal tendons of 16 forearm muscles from one cadaveric specimen were serially dissected, digitized with a Microscribe® G2X Digitizer and reconstructed in 3D with Autodesk® Maya®. Muscle architectural parameters (fiber bundle length/pennation angle/physiological cross-sectional area/volume) were computed. The tendon properties (cross-sectional area/ultimate stress and strain/stiffness/Young’s modulus) were quantified in 5 unembalmed specimens using an Instron 8872 servo-hydraulic testing device with an attached laser reflectance system. SUMMARY. A comprehensive database of the normal architecture and tendon tissue properties of 16 forearm muscles was compiled. This database enables comparison of the musculotendinous morphology between the flexor and extensor muscles as functional groups, between individual muscles and within regions of a single muscle. CONCLUSIONS. Quantification of the architectural parameters and tendon tissue properties of the forearm muscles will enable more realistic dynamic simulation. Clinically, this data could be used as a baseline for the diagnosis of pathology and to set target values for tendon repairs, and enable identification of muscles with similar properties for tendon transfers.

BURGOON1, Jennifer M. and Noelle A. GRANGER2.  1Division of Anatomy, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, 43210, USA; 2Department of Cell and Developmental Biology, School of Medicine, The University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC, 27599, USA. The Role of Gender in First-Year Medical Student Self-Efficacy for the Anatomy Curriculum.
INTRODUCTION. Self-efficacy, an individual’s own judgment of their abilities to successfully perform a task, influences student motivation and impacts such areas as academic achievement, selection of activities, and persistence. This study investigates whether gender differences exist with first-year medical student self-efficacy for the anatomy curriculum. METHODS. Students at the University of North Carolina School of Medicine completed surveys at the beginning and end of the first-year human gross anatomy course. Survey data included anatomical self-efficacy ratings and anatomical experiences prior to medical school. MCAT data was also collected. All data were analyzed using ANCOVA and ANOVA. SUMMARY. When controlling for academic ability (defined as the sum on the Physical Sciences and Biological Sciences sections of the MCAT), females had significantly lower anatomical self-efficacy at the beginning of the anatomy course than did their male classmates [F(1, 136) = 7.554, p = .007]. However, there was no significant difference [F(1, 137) = 1.575, p = .212] in anatomical experiences prior to medical school between genders, even though it is these personal performances that provide the most reliable and influential information for accessing one’s self-efficacy. At the end of the anatomy course, the female students continued to have significantly lower anatomical self-efficacy than did their male classmates [F(1, 102) = 8.135, p = .005]. CONCLUSIONS. Female medical students were found to have lower self-efficacy for the anatomy curriculum than their male classmates at the beginning and end of the first-year human anatomy course. (Sponsored by Grant No. P116B010181 from the US Department of Education, Fund for the Development of Post-Secondary Education.)

Descriptive abstract:

GOGALNICEANU, Petrut, Peter ABRAHAMS, Andrew FLETCHER, Elizabeth MCEVOY, and Jamie ROEBUCK. St. George’s Hospital, London, W1U 6LD, United Kingdom. From Lister’s Tubercle to Rotter’s Nodes – A New Experiment in Clinical Anatomy Podcasting.

INTRODUCTION. Clinically integrated anatomy teaching requires a multitude of resources drawn from the bedside, the dissection room and the radiology unit. These vary in availability and location to such an extent that it is difficult for students to access all of them in a time efficient manner for revision purposes. RESOURCES. A series of anatomy podcasts compatible with MP3 players was designed, using high resolution digital imaging and three dimensional animations combined with narrative and visual explanations. We present two iPod Touch podcasts designed to teach the clinical anatomy of the breast and of the wrist. They incorporate three dimensional simulations, cadaveric dissection, schematic diagrams, angiograms, plain radiographs and computed tomography (CT) reconstructions. Audio and on-screen text commentary are used in conjunction with digital highlighting techniques to guide the student and explain the clinical relevance of anatomy. DESCRIPTION. To design a portable, handheld software package to provide an integrated method of revising clinical anatomy and radiology outside the conventional academic environment. SIGNIFICANCE. Anatomy podcasts provide an affordable and accessible method of teaching clinical anatomy, utilizing digital platforms that are increasingly available in the medical student population. Furthermore, they facilitate integration of basic and clinical sciences utilizing an extensive variety of anatomical imaging. Whilst podcasts cannot replace traditional methods of teaching, they provide a unique educational opportunity in an accessible, visually engaging and interactive environment.