[Skip to Navigation]
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.
December 1959


AMA Arch Derm. 1959;80(6):793. doi:10.1001/archderm.1959.01560240145017

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:—Seven years ago I presented before the Pacific Dermatologic Association a paper on "Diagnostic Pitfalls of Dermal Pathology" (A.M.A. Arch. Dermat. & Syph. 67:18, 1953), in which I catalogued all of the errors I had made or had barely avoided making in many years of work in dermatohistopathology. The recent paper by Dr. H. J. Halpryn and Dr. A. C. Allen on "Epidermal Changes Associated with Sclerosing Hemangiomas" A.M.A. Arch. Dermat. 80:160, 1959) exemplifies one of the dangers against which I cautioned, namely, a complete dependence upon a histopathologic impression without a concomitant thorough examination of the gross lesion or a study of its clinical course.

The lesions under discussion have been interpreted variously and designated as histiocytoma, sclerosing hemangioma, dermatofibroma lenticulare, fibroma durum, and nodular subepidermal fibrosis. In their paper based upon a histopathologic study of sections from 114 lesions obtained from 102 patients, the

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