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?

Elliot Abemayor, MD, PhD; Robert A. Mickel, PhD
UCLA Center for the Health Sciences Los Angeles

JAMA. 1985;253(9):1260.

	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.—

We wish to point out an error in the otherwise excellent article by Slap et al that appeared in the Sept 14 issue of THE JOURNAL.¹ They correctly note that cervical lymphadenopathy in older patients probably represents cancer rather than infection.² Their suggestion to perform biopsies of these enlarged nodes, however, can be disastrous and violates the standard of oncological care in the community of head and neck surgeons. Hayes Martin² warned surgeons never to perform a biopsy of an enlarged, potentially cancer-filled neck node. McGuirt and McCabe³ retrospectively reviewed cases in which such biopsies took place. The incidence of wound infection and local and distant disease was higher in the group that underwent biopsies than in the group undergoing en-bloc resection.

The current evaluation of an enlarged cervical node in an elderly individual should include a head and neck examination of the . . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]

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