[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
October 14, 1933


JAMA. 1933;101(16):1211-1217. doi:10.1001/jama.1933.02740410013004

Every year in the Gynecological Pathology Laboratory of the Johns Hopkins Hospital a few histologic lesions of the cervix are encountered which in certain respects suggest carcinoma and which at times evoke differences of opinion among the staff members as to their benign or malignant nature. Judging from the interesting "suspicious" sections sent to the laboratory from other clinics, it is obvious that others are encountering the same difficulties. The easiest course to follow in a case of uncertain histologic diagnosis is to appease one's scientific conscience with the thought that if the lesion is not cancerous it may be "precancerous" and should therefore be removed. As a result of this method of reasoning I have examined several uteri that had been removed unnecessarily and am convinced that hundreds are sacrificed annually which might be saved if pathologists generally were more familiar with the finer nonmalignant changes in the cervix

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview