[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
April 1951

NEUROAPPENDICOPATHYReview of the Literature and Report on Fifty-Two Cases

Author Affiliations

WASHINGTON, D. C.
From the surgical and laboratory services, George Washington University Hospital.

AMA Arch Surg. 1951;62(4):455-466. doi:10.1001/archsurg.1951.01250030463001
Abstract

APPARENT discrepancies between the clinical and anatomicopathological findings in appendicitis are only too familiar to both surgeons and pathologists. All too often a vermiform appendix is called normal by the surgical pathologist after a cursory examination of one or two sections stained with hematoxylin and eosin has failed to disclose inflammatory cells in the wall. In other cases the specimen is described as an "interval appendix" or a "chronic appendix." this description indicating a failure to discover the underlying disorder. In addition, there is great controversy among surgeons themselves on the subject of "chronic appendicitis." Many do not accept the diagnosis, believing that if an appendix is removed which shows no gross or microscopic evidence of inflammation the relief obtained, if any, is only mental.

There are no specific pathologic changes characteristic of the so-called chronic appendix. Symptoms referable to that organ can be produced by many extra-appendical causes,1

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