Giant Eccrine Adenocarcinoma of the Scalp with Intracranial Invasion

Abstract

To the Editor: We read with interest the article by Donovan and Person (1). This article described the use of vacuum-assisted closure therapy for a large scalp defect resulting from resection of a rare adnexal scalp tumor with intracranial invasion. In this report, the authors demonstrated the use of vacuum-assisted closure therapy for successful closure of a wide scalp defect. Of note, this same case appears to have been published in 2004 in The Laryngoscope by different authors from the same facility (2). The main topic of this article is identical to the previous report and appears to have included the same patient. A review and comparison of the two articles shows that both contain multiple patient photographs and magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans. Photographs and MRI reproductions in the two articles are quite similar, and some appear to be identical. Additionally, the Donovan and Person article (1) did not reference the Laryngoscope publication. Although it is possible that the Donovan and Person article in NEUROSURGERY was submitted before publication of the Laryngoscope article and, therefore, was not referenced for that reason, this seems unlikely, given that there was nearly a 2-year interval between the publication of the two articles. The above suggests potential failings at multiple levels. First is the issue of copyright infringement, since, once submitted, photographs and reproductions become the property of the journal. Therefore, patient photographs and MRI reproductions cannot be reprinted without permission of the journal in which the photographs were first published. If the authors were unaware of the previous publication in The Laryngoscope, this still represents a potential failing. It is the primary responsibility of the author(s) to perform an adequate literature search when submitting a journal article. Today, with the advent of Medline searches, thorough reviews are mandatory. It is less surprising that neither the NEUROSURGERY reviewers nor the two invited discussants noted the above inconsistencies, since the original article was published in the otolaryngology (Ear, Nose, Throat [ENT]) literature. It is not the norm, nor is it reasonable, to expect reviewers and/or discussants to perform exhaustive literature searches of each article that they review. Therefore, it is imperative that situations such as this be reported and highlighted by NEUROSURGERY. This is the best way to minimize such instances and to assure the highest quality of our journal. Serdar Nasir James E. Zins Cleveland, Ohio