[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.147.211.117. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
September 1912

A CRITICISM OF TWO PERCUSSION METHODS FOR THE DIAGNOSIS OF THE ENLARGED THYMUS

Author Affiliations

NEW YORK

From the Pathological Department, New York Foundling Hospital.

Arch Intern Med (Chic). 1912;X(3):214-218. doi:10.1001/archinte.1912.00060210048005
Abstract

Bednar (1852), Vogel (1856), von Mayr (1862) described briefly the percussion signs of the enlarged thymus. Sahli1 (1882) first made an extensive study of these signs on living subjects. Blumenreich2 (1902) investigated the signs on dead subjects, comparing the shape of the percussion dulness with the exposed portion of the gland as revealed at the subsequent autopsies. The principles for determining the thymus by percussion, as laid down by Sahli and modified and amplified by Blumenreich, hold to-day. They have the confirmation of anatomical fact. There have been advanced, however, two percussion methods for the recognition of the enlarged thymus which rest on anatomical hypotheses. The present paper is a discussion of the anatomical conditions underlying these two methods.

While the methods of Sahli and Blumenreich are directed at the more exact determination of the outline of percussion dulness, the methods in question — those of Jacobi3 and

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