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 JAMA  Social Bookmarking   What's this?

Thomas S. Morley, MD
Detroit

JAMA. 1973;225(13):1659.

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

To the Editor.—

I was pleased to see Dr. Mathieu's timely and scholarly rebuttal of Dr. Schaffner's unimpressive efforts to diagnose the, as yet, mythical phenomenon, known as "halothane hepatitis."¹ It must be reassuring to many anesthetists to learn that current immunological tests do not indicate the existence of a specific toxic hepatitis due to halothane. Similarly, clinical and pathological data, when unbiased, indicate that "halothane hepatitis" and acute viral hepatitis are indistinguishable. Special mention should be made of clinical and laboratory evidence of "hypersensitivity" such as skin rashes, arthralgias, and eosinphilia, which have been used by "halothane hepatitis" protagonists in an attempt to delineate this supposed condition (Medical Letter, June 9, 1972). Little do they realize, apparently, that all these features are excellent diagnostic indicators of acute viral hepatitis!^2,3

The epidemiology of postoperative hepatitis also hardly points towards the existence of a distinct "halothane hepatitis." Repeated large . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

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