[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.197.151.150. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
June 1949

DIFFERENTIAL DIAGNOSIS OF BOECK'S SARCOIDOSISReport of Ten Cases with Ocular Involvement

Author Affiliations

CHICAGO
From the Division of Ophthalmology, Department of Surgery, the University of Chicago.

Arch Ophthalmol. 1949;41(6):667-696. doi:10.1001/archopht.1949.00900040684002
Abstract

AT PRESENT, the diagnosis of Boeck's sarcoidosis should be regarded as presumptive, for it is based on incomplete knowledge. There are no sure criteria for absolute diagnosis, whether from histologic sections of any tissue of the body, from laboratory tests, from roentgenograms or from complete postmortem examination. Therefore, all clinical evidence for Boeck's sarcoidosis must be most carefully evaluated before a diagnosis of the disease can be justified. The purpose of this article is to discuss the difficulties in establishing a clinical diagnosis of Boeck's sarcoidosis, to evaluate the more frequent clinical symptoms and signs and to present 10 cases of sarcoidosis and an analysis of the ocular part of the disease.

Considerable confusion exists in the differentiation of sarcoidosis from tuberculosis, silicosis, Hodgkin's disease and similar diseases. In the literature, the diagnosis of sarcoidosis is made in some cases on only scanty evidence. Rossell,1 for example, made the

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