Erschienen in:
01.06.2006 | Letter to the Editor
Minimally accurate nomenclature
verfasst von:
S. C. Cunningham
Erschienen in:
Surgical Endoscopy
|
Ausgabe 6/2006
Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten
Excerpt
Our surgical specialty is minimally invasive, not minimal access. We are minimally invasive surgeons, not minimal-access (or, worse, minimal access) surgeons. The continued use of the terms “minimal-access” [
2] and “minimal access” [
1] in
Surgical Endoscopy is unfortunate. I must ask: why “minimal access” and not “minimally invasive”? Between the two terms is a difference that might seem superficial, but actually, it is quite important, especially as relates to surgery, a field in which little room for sloppiness exists, either in the operating room or in the way we practitioners describe our discipline to the world. Accuracy and meaning count, and the term “minimal access” is inaccurate, missing the meaning we should intend. Apply the most common definitions for the adjective
minimal: “least possible,” “barely adequate,” and “very small or slight,” and then pair “minimal” with the term “access.” The result should hardly be describing either surgery or surgeons. The surgery we practice allows maximal access with minimal invasiveness. The term “minimal access” should be expunged from surgical literature, except when those words describe an unfortunately difficult operative situation in which the surgeon is struggling with precisely that problem—minimal access—which minimally invasive surgery often overcomes. …
