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?

JOSEPH A. ELLIOTT, M.D.; LESTER C. TODD, M.D.

Arch Derm Syphilol. 1924;9(2):208-218.

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

The early diagnosis of primary syphilis is universally recognized as of prime importance in the treatment and prognosis of the disease. The appearance of the lesion, the character of the discharge and the presence or absence of induration are all important clinical findings, yet they are not infallible in the establishment of a positive diagnosis. A demonstration of Spirochaeta pallida in the fluid from the sore has been until recently the only positive criterion at the disposal of the clinician. In many instances these organisms cannot be demonstrated, due either to the fact that the lesion has been treated or that it is complicated by chancroidal infection. In rare instances examination of the untreated, uncomplicated lesion fails to reveal the organisms even on repeated search. A positive diagnosis, therefore, of a suspicious lesion, is often fraught with many difficulties. Any method that will aid in the establishment of a definite . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

Author Affiliations
CHARLOTTE, N. C.

Footnotes
Read at the Forty-Sixth Annual Meeting of the American Dermatological Association, Ann Arbor, Mich., June 7-9, 1923.

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