Abstract
Ann Arbor, Mich., Feb. 27, 1899. <h3>To the Editor:</h3> —In my article published in theJournalof Feb. 18, 1899, (p. 360), in the report of Case No. 5 the statement is made that "she has had local medical treatment for two years with no improvement." Since writing this, the physician who treated the patient before I saw her, and who last saw her about a year before she came to me, informs me that when the patient first came under his observation she was the subject of a marked uterine subinvolution, the fundus reaching as high as the umbilicus. I know the physician to be an accurate observer, and therefore feel it just to say that so far as this condition is concerned, "the local medical treatment" had improved the patient, as involution was complete when she came to my notice. Under report of Case No. 6, in the
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callMore From: JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
