This Article  • References  • Full text PDF  • Send to a friend  • Save in My Folder  • Save to citation manager  • Permissions  Citing Articles  • Contact me when this article is cited  Related Content  • Similar articles in this journal  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

ITS VALUE AS A DIAGNOSTIC AID

GEORGE M. LEWIS, M.D.; GEORGE M. MacKEE, M.D.; MARY E. HOPPER, M.S.

Arch Derm Syphilol. 1938;38(5):713-726.

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

Laboratory methods for the detection and identification of fungi pathogenic to man are time consuming and sometimes difficult to carry out, and the results are frequently inconclusive. The technical details and the interpretation of the microscopic and cultural results all require experience, patience and judgment. For these and other reasons, the development of a cutaneous test of diagnostic specificity would be of considerable importance in the recognition of mycotic diseases. A great deal of work relating to this subject has been carried out since 1902, when Neisser¹ and Plato made an extract of fungi isolated from patients with ringworm and called the product "trichophytin." Nevertheless, there are considerable confusion and differences of opinion as to the value of fungus vaccines in diagnosis and treatment. The Council on Pharmacy and Chemistry of the American Medical Association² has twice postponed consideration of the efficacy of fungus extracts. A study of . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
NEW YORK

From the Skin and Cancer Unit, New York Post-Graduate Medical School and Hospital, Columbia University.

Footnotes
Read at the Sixty-First Annual Meeting of the American Dermatological Association, Inc., Del Monte, Calif., June 9, 1938.

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