This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Citation map  • Citing articles on HighWire  • Citing articles on Web of Science (24)  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Different Views of Small Congenital Nevi

David E. Elder, MB, ChB, FRCPA

Arch Dermatol. 1985;121(10):1263-1265.

	Since this article does not have an abstract, we have provided the first 150 words of the full text PDF and any section headings.

In science, as in nature, much depends on one's point of view. Like the elephant that proved so puzzling to the five blind men who attempted to describe it by touching its parts and found it to resemble a snake, a tree, and so on, a clinicopathologic entity such as a congenital nevus may present several different aspects, depending on the "parts" that one has available for study. These aspects of a congenital nevus might, for present purposes, include its morphology, its demography, and its inherent risk, if any, of progression to a malignant melanoma.

The morphology of congenital nevi is definitively described by Rhodes et al¹ in this issue of the ARCHIVES. These authors studied a population of cases documented as congenital or acquired nevi by parental questionnaire. They conclude that congenital nevi (including "small" congenital nevi) differ significantly from acquired nevi but that methodologic issues preclude a . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
Department of Pathology and Laboratory Medicine Division of Surgical Pathology Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania 3400 Spruce St Philadelphia, PA 19104

CiteULike    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter     What's this?