HALSTED'S radical mastectomy has been condemned by some as incapable of curing cancer. McKinnon,1 for instance, has urged surgeons to reappraise their results from mastectomy after the pathologist has eliminated all "borderline cancer" from the surgical series. Accordingly, a group of pathologists, comprising Pinkerton,* Orrahood, Blumenthal, Wyatt, and Rice, eliminated from 100 surgical cases originally diagnosed as "carcinoma" 6 as "borderline cancer" with a 7th as lympho-sarcoma, and then substituted for the 7 cases eliminated the next 7 successive cases of verified infiltrative carcinoma. There resulted 100 cases which represented successive private patients at Jewish Hospital who had all undergone radical mastectomy of Halsted's type by Fischel † or Keyes from 1928 to 1944 ‡; 34 of the 100 patients had also had postoperative irradiation and some of them had received hormones. Ten-year follow-ups were available on 90 of the 100 patients, and Fischel's 10 unfollowed patients were classified
KEYES EL, ORRAHOOD MD, BLUMENTHAL HT. TREATED COMPARED WITH UNTREATED BREAST CANCER: One Hundred Cases of Fischel's vs. One Hundred Cases of Daland's. AMA Arch Surg. 1954;68(6):820–828. doi:10.1001/archsurg.1954.01260050822011
Customize your JAMA Network experience by selecting one or more topics from the list below.
Create a personal account or sign in to: