Turning a Case Report Into a Publishable Review: A Practical Guide for Surgical Authors

Single case reports remain a common form of scholarly submission, particularly from residents, students, and clinician-educators. Many are thoughtfully written and describe interesting clinical problems, yet most do not reach publication. The reason is rarely a lack of effort or clinical insight. More often, it is a problem of scope. Over the past several years, <i>The American Surgeon</i> has worked with authors to transform narrowly focused case reports into case-based reviews that contribute meaningfully to the literature. When this succeeds, a clinical observation shifts from description to synthesis, and from recounting an individual event to offering guidance that informs practice and is cited by others. Making this transition requires a deliberate change in framing. A practical approach begins with defining a broader clinical question and grounding it in current literature. A structured review-particularly of articles and reviews published in the last three to five years-helps focus the discussion on contemporary standards and areas of debate. When the literature includes multiple reports or collected series, an updated systematic review may be a more appropriate strategy. Successful reviews are organized around how surgeons approach clinical problems and make decisions. They address a knowledge gap not yet resolved by existing literature and use an illustrative case to anchor a broader discussion. A case report describes one patient. A publishable paper must speak to many surgeons.