A number of leading physicians have repeatedly voiced the opinion that diagnostic excisions and diagnostic curettages are dangerous, because these small interventions, according to their view, tend to spread cancer cells.1 Clinical experience does not bear this out. Martzloff2 recently has sifted the histories of patients with cancers of the cervix, seen and operated on at Johns Hopkins over a period of many years. Of thirty-eight who remained well over long periods of time, fourteen, or 36.8 per cent., had had diagnostic excisions, or excochleation of the growth. Diagnostic excision and curettage save us from committing grave blunders, such as that of performing unnecessary operations on benign conditions and from incomplete operatoins in the presence of malignancy. The following cases are to the point.
—F. H., aged 60, whose menopause occurred twenty-two years ago, and who was nervous, hysterical and constantly running to physicians for examination,
FRANK RT. THE VALUE OF DIAGNOSTIC EXCISIONS AND DIAGNOSTIC CURETTAGE IN GYNECOLOGY: WITH ILLUSTRATIVE CASES. JAMA. 1924;82(8):619–622. doi:10.1001/jama.1924.02650340029009
Browse and subscribe to JAMA Network podcasts!
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: