Abstract
Although the use of eponyms to describe specific surgical operations is often discouraged (1), the custom is so deeply ingrained in medical writing that readers inevitably encounter them. Therefore, for the sake of clarity in communications, one should strive to be correct in their use. A classic case of perpetuation of misinformation is the use of eponyms to describe the operations performed to correct varicocele. Most seemingly authoritative reviews repeatedly state that the eponym “Ivanissevich procedure” refers to the transinguinal ligation of the spermatic vein. This is a mistake and is repeated through the published literature since access to the original papers may require an additional effort rarely made in this era of computerized searches (2–5).
Highlights
The use of eponyms to describe specific surgical operations is often discouraged [1], the custom is so deeply ingrained in medical writing that readers inevitably encounter them
A classic case of perpetuation of misinformation is the use of eponyms to describe the operations performed to correct varicocele
Most seemingly authoritative reviews repeatedly state that the eponym “Ivanissevich procedure” refers to the transinguinal ligation of the spermatic vein
Summary
The use of eponyms to describe specific surgical operations is often discouraged [1], the custom is so deeply ingrained in medical writing that readers inevitably encounter them. For the sake of clarity in communications, one should strive to be correct in their use. A classic case of perpetuation of misinformation is the use of eponyms to describe the operations performed to correct varicocele.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
