Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Design
Editorial
The authors argue that the anatomical nomenclature of the heart should be updated to align with the standard anatomical position to minimize confusion.
As anatomists we rely on the nomenclature of structures in order to describe them appropriately, particularly their orientation in respect to their surrounding. The terminology used by the anatomist to describe an organ, muscle, or nerve within the body is taught to medical students as law. Students learn to describe structures in the "anatomical position", which has been accepted in the literature since the original Latin Nomina Anatomica. They therefore familiarize themselves with the use of terms such as superior, inferior, posterior and anterior to describe all anatomical structures, except in respect of the heart. The heart is still described in the original Valentine position. As anatomists we owe it to the medical and research community to correct the nomenclature to minimize confusion, and to describe the heart properly in respect to its surrounding structures.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Loukas et al. (2015) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: