Jackowe David J, Moore Michael K, Bruner Andrew E, Fredieu John R
Department of Surgery, University of Hawaii, School of Medicine, Honolulu, HI 96813, USA.
J Hand Surg Am. 2007 Nov;32(9):1471-6. doi: 10.1016/j.jhsa.2007.07.006.
The anatomic accuracy of Rembrandt's The Anatomy Lesson of Dr. Nicolaes Tulp (1632) has been debated in the literature for many years. The white cord that courses along the ulnar aspect of the carpus and small finger of the cadaver in Dr. Tulp's dissection conforms to no normal anatomic structure and is believed to represent an anomalous branch of the ulnar nerve, an artistic error, or a combination of both. After the discovery of an accessory abductor digiti minimi (AADM) during a routine dissection of a late-middle-aged male cadaver, we noted that the course of its tendon over the hypothenar eminence resembled the white cord in the painting. After conducting a detailed literature search and anatomic interpretation of the painting, we established 4 criteria for identifying the white cord. Using these criteria, we evaluated the plausibility of an AADM being represented in the painting. We conclude that an AADM should be considered as a possible explanation for the white cord.
伦勃朗的《尼古拉斯·杜尔博士的解剖学课》(1632年)的解剖学准确性在文献中已被争论多年。在杜尔博士的解剖中,沿着尸体腕部尺侧和小指走行的白色条索不符合任何正常解剖结构,被认为代表尺神经的异常分支、艺术失误或两者兼而有之。在对一名中老年男性尸体进行常规解剖时发现了小指展肌副肌(AADM)后,我们注意到其肌腱在小鱼际隆起上的走行与画中的白色条索相似。在对这幅画进行详细的文献检索和解剖学解读后,我们确定了识别白色条索的4条标准。使用这些标准,我们评估了画中描绘的是AADM的合理性。我们得出结论,AADM应被视为白色条索的一种可能解释。