This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.
To the Editor:
—The conception of myocardosis as developed by Hyman and Parsonnet in The Journal, May 24, is a distinct contribution toward a better understanding of this rather confused condition. All are more or less familiar with the objections voiced in regard to the loosely used term "chronic myocarditis" as it appears on hospital records and death certificates; the need for a word more expressive of the real underlying pathologic changes has apparently been answered here.The term "myocardosis," as Hyman and Parsonnet have pointed out, is not a new one. Dr. David Riesman of Philadelphia has been advocating the employment of this term for at least the past six years, both in his classroom work and in his hospital service, and I have been using this term for some time myself. It has always appeared strange that the word has not come into wider usage.The contribution made
Wolffe JB. MYOCARDOSIS. JAMA. 1930;95(5):361. doi:10.1001/jama.1930.02720050049028