Rohen's color atlas of anatomy...is 5th edition ok?

[darktooth]

I want to get a book to help with lab practicals but I'm wondering if the edition matters?

We're using the 7th edition...however, the 5th edition is significantly cheaper. It was published 2002...will I be missing anything by going with the 5th edition?


thanks.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[scorm]

Pretty sure anatomy hasn't changed in quite some time. The updates to these books mostly consist of rearranging the material and making it more reader-friendly; the anatomy itself stays the same.

 

[tiedyeddog]

you won't miss anything, the old editions are fine for anatomy

 

[yehhhboiii]

there was a name change like a year ago, probably the transverse cervical artery

 

[Planes2Doc]

there was a name change like a year ago, probably the transverse cervical artery

Even with name changes on practicals, professors are usually fine with either term. This is especially relevant for the fibularis/peroneus longus and brevis. I've heard them used interchangeably all the time.

 

[calvnandhobbs68]

I heard they found a new organ since the 5th edition so better not.

 

[unhappytnt]

I heard they found a new organ since the 5th edition so better not.

 

[chemsmith]

Unless human anatomy has changed since the time they published 5th edition...

Seriously this is like the only subject in med school where you can be pretty safe using an "outdated" textbook

 

[kami333]

I heard they found a new organ since the 5th edition so better not.

They might have the flexor digiti minimi longus:
http://www.academia.edu/683937/An_additional_flexor_of_the_fifth_digit_Flexor_digiti_minimi_longus

 

[001100010010011]

The newest edition contains a cross-section of the soul.

 

[DoctorDermis]

Speaking from my own experience and anatomy having been one of my best subjects during MS1, Rohen's should be a supplement to your Netter's, so the 5th edition is perfectly fine.