[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]
November 19, 1927


JAMA. 1927;89(21):1802. doi:10.1001/jama.1927.02690210068031

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 my article "Interesting Aspects of a Case of Congenitally Absent Gallbladder" (The Journal, August 27) I commented on a similar case reported by Dr. Lintz.My comment was: "The exceptional condition found by Dr. Lintz is, in great likelihood, to be explained on the same principle as obtains in the recovery of B bile in long past cholecystectomized patients, wherein the biliary ducts often undergo gradual dilatation."In a letter which appeared in The Journal, September 24, Dr. Lintz rejects my explanation, stating that I missed the crux of the situation, because the surgeon, as I had stated in my article, had very carefully examined for dilatation of the biliary ducts, but no dilatation of the ducts could be found. The B bile could therefore not have come from dilated ducts.I believe that I did not make my explanation entirely clear. The dilatation I referred

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