[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
April 25, 1942


Author Affiliations

Brookline Mass.

JAMA. 1942;118(17):1514. doi:10.1001/jama.1942.02830170092023

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:—  In The Journal, March 7, page 855, there is a statement with regard to cancer of the prostate. In the first paragraph of the reply to the question it is stated that:It is the opinion among urologists that once the diagnosis of carcinoma of the prostate has been made it is technically impossible to do any sort of surgical procedure that would effect a cure. Once the diagnosis of carcinoma of the prostate has been definitely made, the condition is no longer surgical.Undoubtedly the opinion that is expressed is held by a large proportion of urologists, chiefly those who have never done a perineal prostatectomy. A small but steadily increasing number have become convinced of the soundness of Hugh Young's teachings concerning the value of total perineal prostatectomy for selected cases of early prostatic cancer. Frank Hinman, Alexander Randall and Roy Henline are among the

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