[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
October 18, 1941


Author Affiliations


JAMA. 1941;117(16):1377. doi:10.1001/jama.1941.02820420069029

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.


To the Editor:—  Few surgeons appreciate how important it is that a complete record be made of various operative procedures. It is not sufficient to say that cholecystectomy or hysterectomy or appendectomy or what not "was carried out in the usual manner." Such short cuts are definitely out of order if the patient and the physician next seeing the patient are to be given consideration. It is important to know how much of the cystic duct was left intact and whether the remnant of the cystic duct was examined for the presence of calculi. It is important to know at what level supravaginal hysterectomy was done. It is important to know in what manner amputation of the appendix was carried out, how much of the stump remained and whether or not the stump was buried. On the surface, such matters seem trifling, but several cases of gangrenous appendicitis with perforation

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview