This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citing articles on Web of Science (3)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Accomplishments

RALPH F. BOWERS, M.D.

AMA Arch Surg. 1962;85(3):470-475.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

Every conscientious surgeon must be bedeviled by the questionable use of a blind procedure, especially if it requires extensive surgical maneuvering in regard to its feasibility and appropriateness.^1-7 It does not suffice to state to oneself that the urgency of the emergency permits this large mutilating procedure. That idea can be dangerous, as it would permit the surgeon to rationalize a step that might be foolish and unsafe. If it fails, a certain humility, sense of remorse, and frustration must follow. To avoid this, one simply examines the results of this modus operandi and thereby recognizes what satisfaction exists from the effect, but, more importantly, it may well foretell the reasons for not doing the procedure.

This study includes observations upon 13 patients who had the so-called blind gastric resection for bleeding peptic ulcer (Table). A total of 643 bleeding-ulcer patients had been treated by cooperative medical-surgical therapy, and . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
MEMPHIS

From the Surgical Service, Veterans Administration Medical Teaching Group Hospital, and the Department of Surgery, University of Tennessee College of Medicine.

Footnotes
Submitted for publication Nov. 20, 1961.

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?