Template talk:Human arteries

Anatomy: Gross Template‑class

	This template is within the scope of WikiProject Anatomy, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Anatomy on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AnatomyWikipedia:WikiProject AnatomyTemplate:WikiProject AnatomyAnatomy articles
Template	This template does not require a rating on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
	This template has been classified as relating to gross anatomy.

Is there an order to the arteries in this template that I don't understand...?

I think they ought to be alphabetized -- within the subdivisions. That is, the arteries in the thorax section ought to be alphabetic order, those in the upper limb section ought to be alphabetic, those within the lower limb section ought to be alphabetic et cetera. Nephron 18:34, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

My goal has been mimic the order of presentation of Gray's Anatomy where possible. While Gray's may not be the most up-to-date resource, it is public-domain, internationally accepted, and there are plenty of images available to support it. I've created List of images and subjects in Gray's Anatomy: VI. The Arteries to assist in these efforts. But I can see the benefit to other approaches. There would also be benefits to Nomina Anatomica or the Anatomy axis of MeSH (and there could be others I'm not familiar with.) While I do think that a logical order would be more scalable than an alphabetic one, but I'd be open to hearing about other approaches. --Arcadian 23:24, 28 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I was noticing the order of the listing of arteries a week or so back...it seemed to me that they should be ordered by their route through the body, with the lungs being the logical start/end point...any thoughts? bcatt 01:13, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I like the anatomical approach but... wouldn't the heart be the logical starting point? S e miconscious • talk 01:55, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I suggested the lungs because the heart has two arterial exit points, and a two sets of venous entry points. Plus, the heart is more of a "secondary" starting and ending point in the circulatory system, whereas the lungs are the "true" start and end point (where the deoxygenated blood is exchanged for oxygenated blood). Maybe this layout is better suited for a more general description of the whole circulatory system though, due to the naturally "anomalous" nature of the pulmonary circulation. But then again, perhaps a template laying out the arteries should not exist without a layout of the veins as well...I don't know. bcatt 07:04, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Cool. I figured there was a simple explanation that I just didn't see. Once you get anywhere below the neck you're out of my area of knowledge. :) S e miconscious • talk 08:18, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

OK, sudden second thoughts (leave it to a Libra to argue with herself)...perhaps there should be a set of three templates (and there probably already is): arteries, veins, and both for a complete overview of the circulatory system. There would be two ways of organizing the arterial template:

start at the heart and go: pulmonary artery->aorta->(rest of systemic arteries) - which would essentially be starting with the end of the circulatory system; or,
start at the lungs and go: aorta->(rest of systemic arteries)->pulmonary artery - which would be starting with the beginning of the circulatory system, but leaving a primary artery until the end of the list...however, I think there are ways to organize the template to make this less of an issue...

thoughts? bcatt 07:23, 29 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think going from the heart is the way to go-- but practically it isn't workable because of the branching patterns.

It is easy to write: ascending aorta - aortic arch - brachiocephalic - subclavian - internal thoracic... but that only applies to the right side. You have the same problem for the carotids.

What about the internal carotid trifurcation and the Circle of Willis? Aside from those examples-- I think it quickly is a mess when one tries to organize the abdominal vessels as there are a lot branches from the abdominal aorta and we have 2nd level (e.g. left gastric) and 3rd level branches (e.g. gastroduodenal). Some 3rd level branches anastomose to what are 3rd level branches on the other side (e.g. l. gastroepiploic arises from the celiac-splenic; r. gastroepiploic arises from the celiac-hepatic-gastroduodenal). Practically, I think this would mean-- some vessels have to appear several times which I think would be confusing.

IMHO, one really needs a flow chart-- to make this work nicely. I've seen such a thing-- my Anatomy & Physiology text has a beautiful set of flow charts and I'd have reproduced them & improved 'em... but the Wikisoftware isn't quite there yet. I think alphabetizing the vessels in their respective regions would be easiest. Perhaps a separate article could be written about the branching pattern-- that links to the template. Nephron 00:38, 30 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Too big?[edit]

I'm wondering if this template ought to be split into regional ones-- it is getting fairly large.

I tend to think a set of regional templates (i.e. one for the thorax, abdomen, upper limbs, lower limbs, head & neck) might do better. Nephron T|C 19:23, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've done a first cut of a split. The divisions are as follows:

Template:Arteries of head and neck - Gray's 144-148
Template:Arteries of upper limbs - Gray's 149-152
Template:Arteries of thorax and abdomen - Gray's 141-143 and 153-156
Template:Arteries of lower limbs - Gray's 157-162

Feel free to edit as needed. --Arcadian 21:36, 27 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Looks good. :) Nephron T|C 02:54, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]