Primary carcinoma of the Fallopian tube is an infrequently found pathologic condition. Up to 1935, Robinson had found but 349 cases in the literature. It frequently, though not always, follows chronic inflammation of the tubes, from which it is usually not differentiated if the tube is removed intact. The diagnosis, as a rule, is established by the pathologist on microscopic examination of the oviduct. The opening of all tubes after their ablation and their inspection for papillary projections, as advised by Gupta and recommended by Kahn and Norris, would not infrequently prove helpful in establishing the diagnosis. The last named authors suggest that, in the presence of a brownish or bloody discharge, not accounted for by a curettage, in a woman beyond 40, tubal carcinoma should be suspected and the oviducts should be carefully palpated for enlarged areas. Because a number of patients have been operated on with the diagnosis of chronic pelvic inflammatory disease, incomplete operations, which are not a satisfactory method of treatment, have been performed. This may account, in part at least, for a number of poor results reported in the literature. The treatment should consist of a panhysterectomy with bilateral salpingooöphorectomy and the excision of palpable glands. The operation should be followed by deep x-ray therapy. This form of treatment may improve the results of the future. In my own case, the diagnosis of primary carcinoma of the Fallopian tube was not established even at operation. The ovarian metastases appeared so much more important than the tubal lesion that an operative diagnosis of ovarian carcinoma was made. The histologic examination of the excised pelvic organs revealed the true diagnosis. While the patient has made a good operative recovery and has been subjected to deep x-ray therapy, the prognosis should be guarded and only time will reveal the ultimate result.
Search from 250 M+ research papersSearch from 250 M+ research papers
Jan 1, 1960
Anni Helo 
Open Access