Goulon M, Goulon-Goeau C
Rev Prat. 1989 Nov 21;39(27):2428-33.
The concept of cerebral death is universally accepted. It rests on a panel of signs which must all be present and constant, and provided this is the case no error is possible. No authentic case throwing doubt on this statement has ever been reported. It has been said that the term "coma dépassé" which we chose in 1959 could lead to confusion with the different degrees of coma and for this reason, be an obstacle to organ donation. I do not consider this a satisfactory explanation. In favour of the appellation "coma dépassé" are the originality of its first description and its use in the French medical language. It does not matter if "cerebral death" is preferred, both terms being synonymous. The individualization of "coma dépassé" and the possibility of grafting organs with success are acquisitions separated by only a few years. They have made it possible to obtain the remarkable successes known to every one, they have given medical thinking a new dimension and placed upon doctors an increased responsibility.
脑死亡的概念已被普遍接受。它基于一组必须全部出现且恒定不变的体征，只要情况如此，就不可能出错。从未有过对这一说法产生怀疑的真实案例报道。有人说，我们在1959年选用的“深度昏迷”一词可能会与不同程度的昏迷相混淆，因此会成为器官捐献的障碍。我认为这不是一个令人满意的解释。支持“深度昏迷”这一称谓的理由是其首次描述的独特性以及它在法语医学语言中的使用。如果更倾向于使用“脑死亡”也无妨，因为这两个术语是同义词。“深度昏迷”的个体化以及成功进行器官移植的可能性是相隔仅数年取得的成果。它们使得取得了众所周知的显著成功成为可能，为医学思维开辟了新的维度，并给医生带来了更大的责任。
